Loading...
09/21/2006 - Minutes (2) PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH WORK SESSION THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 21 , 2006 The City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, met in a Work Session on Thursday, September 21, 2006, at 5 : 30 p.m. in Room 326, City Council Office, City County Building, 451 South State Street. In Attendance : Council Members Carlton Christensen, Van Turner, Eric Jergensen, Nancy Saxton, Jill Remington Love and Dave Buhler. Absent: Councilmember Soren Simonsen. Also in Attendance : Cindy Gust-Jenson, Executive Council Director; Edwin Rutan, City Attorney; Russell Weeks, Council Policy Analyst; Sylvia Jones, Council Research and Policy Analyst/Constituent Liaison; Jennifer Bruno, Council Policy Analyst; Cindy Rockwood, Council Senior Secretary; Roy Williams, Airport Executive Director; Jodi Howick, Assistant City Attorney; Rocky Fluhart, Mayor' s Chief Administrative Officer; D. J. Baxter, Mayor' s Senior Advisor; Louis Zunguze, Community Development Director; Brent Wilde, Community Development Deputy Director; LuAnn Clark, Housing and Neighborhood Development Director; Daniel Mule ' , Treasurer; Tim Harpst, Transportation Director; John Spencer, Real Property Manager; Alison McFarlane, Senior Advisor for Economic Development; Sherrie Collins, Special Project Grants Monitoring Specialist; Rick Graham, Public Services Director; Val Pope, Parks Division Manager; Joe Cyr, Salt Lake Police Detective; Craig Peterson Legislative Consultant, John Inglish and Dave Huber, Utah Transit Authority, Chuck Chapel, Director of Wasatch Front Regional Council and Chris Meeker, Chief Deputy City Recorder. Councilmember Buhler presided at and conducted the meeting. The meeting was called to order at 5 : 32 p.m. AGENDA ITEMS #1 . 5 : 32 : 33 PM INTERVIEW DARIAN ABEGGLEN PRIOR TO CONSIDERATION OF HER APPOINTMENT TO THE GOLF ENTERPRISE FUND ADVISORY BOARD . View Attachments Councilmember Buhler said the item would be forwarded to the Consent Agenda. #2 . 5 : 36 : 29 PM INTERVIEW ILA ROSE FIFE PRIOR TO CONSIDERATION OF HER REAPPOINTMENT TO THE LIBRARY BOARD . View Attachments Councilmember Buhler said the item would be forwarded to the Consent Agenda. #3 . 5 : 40 : 21 PM INTERVIEW AHMED M. ALI PRIOR TO CONSIDERATION OF HIS APPOINTMENT TO THE HOUSING TRUST FUND ADVISORY BOARD . View Attachments 06 - 1 PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH WORK SESSION THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 21 , 2006 Councilmember Buhler said the item would be forwarded to the Consent Agenda . #4 . 5 : 43 : 30 PM RECEIVE A BRIEFING REGARDING RESOLUTIONS INITIATING EMINENT DOMAIN PROCEEDINGS RELATING TO THE WESTSIDE RAILROAD RE- ALIGNMENT AND PUBLIC WAY IMPROVEMENTS, PROJECT NO. 109009 . View Attachments Russ Weeks, John Spencer, Larry Spendlove and D. J. Baxter briefed the Council using the attached handouts . #5 . 5 : 58 : 31 PM HOLD A DISCUSSION REGARDING THE AIRPORT LIGHT RAIL LINE . View Attachments John Inglish, Craig Peterson, Roy Williams and Chuck Chapel briefed the Council using the attached handouts . #6 . 8 : 31 : 09 PM RECEIVE A BRIEFING REGARDING A REQUEST TO CREATE AN ORDINANCE TO ALLOW BUS SHELTER AND RELATED SIGNAGE AND CONSIDER WHETHER TO SUPPORT ISSUING A REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS TO BUILD AND MAINTAIN BUS SHELTERS . View Attachments Russ Weeks, Brent Wilde, Ed Rutan, and Dave Huber briefed the Council with the attached handouts . #7 . 8 : 59 : 58 PM HOLD A FOLLOW-UP DISCUSSION REGARDING THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (CIP) . View Attachments Luann Clark briefed the Council with the attached handouts . #8 . 7 : 46 : 22 PM CONSIDER A MOTION TO ENTER INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION FOR THE PURPOSE OF STRATEGY SESSIONS TO DISCUSS THE PURCHASE, EXCHANGE, OR LEASE OF REAL PROPERTY WHEN PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF THE TRANSACTION WOULD DISCLOSE THE APPRAISAL OR ESTIMATED VALUE OF THE PROPERTY UNDER CONSIDERATION OR PREVENT THE PUBLIC BODY FROM COMPLETING THE TRANSACTION ON THE BEST POSSIBLE TERMS, AND DISCUSS PENDING OR REASONABLY IMMINENT LITIGATION; PURSUANT TO UTAH CODE ANN. §§ 52-4-204 , 52-4-205 (1) (C)AND (D) AND ATTORNEY-CLIENT MATTERS THAT ARE PRIVILEGED PURSUANT TO UTAH CODE ANN. § 78-24-8 . Councilmember Christensen moved and Councilmember Love seconded to enter into Executive Session, which motion carried, all members present voted aye . See file M 06-2 for sworn statement and confidential tape . 06 - 2 PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH WORK SESSION THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 21 , 2006 #9 . 9 : 36 : 09 PM REPORT OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, INCLUDING A REVIEW OF COUNCIL INFORMATION ITEMS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS. See File M 06-5 for announcements . The meeting adjourned at 9 : 38 p .m. Council Chair Chief Deputy City Recorder This document along with the digital recording constitute the official minutes for the City Council Work Session held September 21, 2006. Cm 06 - 3 BOARD APPOINTMENT: Darian Abegglen — Golf Enterprise Fund Advisory Board INTRODUCTION: Mayor Anderson is recommending Darian Abegglen, resident of District 6, to be appointed to the Golf Enterprise Fund Advisory Board. If appointed Ms. Abegglen will serve a term extending through July 19, 2010. Ms. Abegglen will replace Steve Szykula whose term has expired. APPLICANT INFORMATION: Ms. Abegglen is a Program Manager with Salt Lake County Parks & Recreation Division and would like to be more involved with the golf programs offered by Salt Lake City. Ms. Abegglen has managed and coordinated a variety of youth and adult recreation programs along with managing and monitoring their annual budget. She has been involved with the Salt Lake Organizing Committee/2002 Winter Games. RESPONSE DEADLINE: If you have any objection to this appointment, please let Vicki know by 5:00 p.m. on Friday August 25, 2006. CURRENT COMPOSITION OF THE BOARD: The Golf Enterprise Fund Advisory Board is comprised of seven members. As required by ordinance, six members are Salt Lake City residents and one member is a Salt Lake County resident. Current members include: Cheri Ause, District 7; Toni Guest, County Resident; Elaine McDonald, District 1; Stanley Parrish, District 3; and Thomas E. Wright, District 6. BOARD STRUCTURE: The Golf Enterprise Fund Advisory Board was created to provide business oversight and insights into the operation and maintenance of the City's golf course system. All actions voted on by the Board constitute recommendations to the Golf Director. The Board has the following powers and duties: recommend the adoption and alteration of all rules, regulations, procedures and ordinances for the use and operation of golf facilities within the City; recommend the planning, establishment and approval of all construction and expansion projects for City golf programs and facilities; recommend broad policy regarding the operation and management of City golf programs and facilities which may include establishing rate structures for golf fees, leasing of space or facilities and determining the number or type of concessionaires or services at City golf facilities; review and make recommendations on the annual golf budget; and assist the Golf Director in the continuing orderly development and promotion of City golf facilities in order to best serve the residents of Salt Lake City. Board Appointment - Library Board Ila Rose Fife INTRODUCTION: Mayor Anderson is recommending that Ila Rose Fife resident of District 2; be appointed to serve on the Library Board. If appointed Ms. Fife will serve a term extending through June 30, 2009 and will replace Paul Dalrymple whose term has expired. APPLICANT INFORMATION: Ms. Ila Rose Fife is retired and has always enjoyed visiting Chapman Branch and the City Library. She was a former school board member and appreciates the importance of libraries to the public school system. Ms. Fife notes that the City is in the early stages for a new library in the Glendale Community and she would like to contribute and represent the ideas and wishes from the library patrons'. RESPONSE DEADLINE: If you have any objection to this appointment, please let Vicki know by 5:00 p.m. on Tuesday, September 12, 2006. CURRENT COMPOSITION OF LIBRARY BOARD: All members of the Salt Lake City Library Board are required to be City residents. Board members include Susan Aldous, District 7; Ruby Chacon, District 3; Rosalind Mcgee, District 6; Helen Rollins, District 2; Bryon Russell, District 3; Roger D. Sandack, District 6; and Mary Ann Villarreal, District 1. BOARD STRUCTURE: The mission of this nine-member board is to make and adopt rules for the operation and care of the libraries and branches; control expenditures of the library fund; purchase, lease and sell land; purchase, lease and erect or sell buildings; establish policies for operation of the library and appoint a Librarian/Director. HOUSING TRUST FUND ADVISORY BOARD APPOINTMENT -Ahmed Ali INTRODUCTION: Mayor Anderson is recommending Ahmed Ali, a resident of District 5, to be appointed to the Housing Trust Fund Advisory Board. If appointed he would serve a term through December 28, 2008 and will replace Ed Barbanell who has resigned. APPLICANT INFORMATION: Mr. Ali is a family and student advocate. His interest in this committee is to work with the community and assist them with their basic needs in the areas where there can have community support. Mr. Ali has attached a letter of appreciation from J. Bernard Machen, Former President, University of Utah and a memorandum from the Management Staff of International Rescue Committee nominating him for the Sarlo Distinguished Humanitarian Service Award. RESPONSE DEADLINE: If you have any objection to this appointment, please let Vicki know by 5:00 p.m. on Tuesday September 12, 1006. COMPOSITION OF HOUSING TRUST FUND ADVISORY BOARD: Members of the Housing Trust Fund Advisory Board are appointed by the Mayor with the advice and consent of the Council. The board will meet at least ten times per year. City ordinance states that the board shall consist of eleven appointed members, "at least one of whom has a household income which qualifies such person for affordable housing benefits or programs." All members must be Salt Lake City residents The ordinance requires one member from each Council district who has "expertise or experience in affordable and/or special needs housing, which may include a full range of such expertise and/or experience from citizens who are considering purchasing their first home to citizens who have a strong background in affordable housing." The remaining four board members are appointed to at- large positions and shall have "experience or expertise in areas of business, real estate, or housing development generally." Members are limited to no more than two consecutive terms. Current members include: Curtis W. Anderson, District 1; Edward Barbanell, District 5; Karen Cahoon, District 5; William Dalton, District 4; John Francis, District 2; Daniel J.H. Greenwood, District 3; Cara Aimee Lingstuyl, District 6; Kent W. Moore, District 1; Peter Morgan, District 6; Nancy Pace, District 4; and Faina Raik, District 3. BOARD STRUCTURE: The Housing Trust Fund Advisory Board was created to "advise and make recommendations to the City Administration and the City Council on affordable housing and special needs housing issues" for Salt Lake City. The board shall implement the policies and goals of the City's Community Housing Plan; identify criteria by which loans and grants should be made using the City's Consolidated Plan; recommend distribution of monies or assets in the Housing Trust Fund; consult with experts in areas such as finance, real estate, and affordable housing development to obtain advice on specific projects; develop an application process for funds; annually review and monitor the activities of grants and loans; and serve as a coordination body and resource for organizations interested in affordable and special needs housing issues. All actions taken by the board shall constitute recommendations to the CED Director, the Mayor, and the City Council. The CED Director and the Mayor shall have the power to review, ratify, modify or disregard any recommendation submitted by the board. MEMORANDUM DATE: September 19, 2006 TO: City Council Members FROM: Russell Weeks RE: Eminent Domain Proceedings relating to the Westside Railroad Re-alignment and Public Way Improvements-(500 North to 200 South and 500 West to 1000 West)—Project No. 109009 CC: Cindy Gust-Jenson,Rocky Fluhart, Sam Guevara, Louis Zunguze,DJ Baxter, Ed Rutan, Larry Spendlove,Matthew Williams,John Spencer,Gary Mumford This memorandum pertains to City Council consideration of motions in connection with eminent domain proceedings relating to the Westside Railroad Re-alignment and Public Way improvements, Project No. 109009. The project involves improvements in an area bordered roughly by 500 North, 200 South, 500 West and 1000 West streets. The City Council has scheduled a briefing and a public hearing on September 21 to consider resolutions to exercise the City's power of eminent domain on properties within the borders listed in the preceding paragraph. As the Administration's memorandum dated August 28 indicates, Project No. 109009 is more commonly known as the project to reconfigure rail lines in the Grant Tower area. Reconfiguring the lines would accomplish several things. It would allow Union Pacific railroad trains to travel at higher rates of speed through Salt Lake City, eliminating a bottleneck in the railroad's system. It would allow for the extension of railroad quiet zones within the City. It would enable Union Pacific to cease freight traffic along the Folsom Street corridor, and convey to Salt Lake City all associated real property to provide a corridor along which to restore City Creek to the surface—a goal of the Salt Lake Chamber's Downtown Rising initiative. It would remove freight train traffic from a line that runs parallel to 900 South Street. According to the Administration,Union Pacific would convey all real property associated with the 900 South rail line to Salt Lake City for use as linear park,pursuant to the West Salt Lake Master Plan. The City Council is scheduled to consider five resolutions relating to Project No. 109009. It should be noted that the City Attorney's Office has advised that the City Council consider each resolution separately. Options As with all items scheduled for formal City Council consideration, the Council has the options of adopting a motion or not adopting a motion. In this specific instance, it is unlikely that any of the five resolutions would be amended. It should be noted that the titles of the potential motions use Roman numerals merely to identify them. If each resolution is adopted, it will be numbered by the City in the City's standard manner. 1 Potential Motions Resolution I I move that City Council adopt a resolution initiating eminent domain proceedings on a parcel of real estate located in Salt Lake County and identified as parcel number 08-35-458-023 owned by R&R Center LLC at approximately 3 North 800 West Street in Salt Lake City. I move that the City Council consider the next item on the agenda. Resolution II I move that City Council adopt a resolution initiating eminent domain proceedings on a parcel of real estate located in Salt Lake County and identified as parcel number 15-02-228-001 owned by Terry Nish at approximately 761 West South Temple Street in Salt Lake City. I move that the City Council consider the next item on the agenda. Resolution III I move that City Council adopt a resolution initiating eminent domain proceedings on a parcel of real estate located in Salt Lake County and identified as parcel number 15-02-227-003 owned by Grand Staircase Inc. at approximately 767 West South Temple Street in Salt Lake City. I move that the City Council consider the next item on the agenda. Resolution IV I move that City Council adopt a resolution initiating eminent domain proceedings on parcels of real estate located in Salt Lake County and identified as parcels numbered 15-02-227- 001 and 15-02-227-002 owned by Jason Broschinsky at approximately 779/799 West South Temple and 777 West South Temple streets,respectively, in Salt Lake City. I move that the City Council consider the next item on the agenda. Resolution V I move that City Council adopt a resolution initiating eminent domain proceedings on a parcels of real estate located in Salt Lake County and identified as parcels numbered 15-02-228- 003, 15-02-228-004, 15-02-228-005 owned by Knox Investment LTD at approximately 741 West South Temple, 741 West South Temple, and 721 West South Temple Streets in Salt Lake City. I move that the City Council consider the next item on the agenda. 2 li ! ROSS C. "ROCKY"ANDERSON SALT 1�_QJ (r1�n�j��IJ1UpO. �e. II�Oj MAYOR V1 1 Ih Ij 1 OFFICE OF THE MAYOR MEMORANDUM c7aJA2 TO: Rocky Fluhart soe From: D.J. Baxter, Senior Advisor to the Mayor 46 Date: August 28, 2006 Re: Potential Use of Eminent Domain for Grant Tower Property Acquisition Summary: The Grant Tower rail reconfiguration project is moving forward quickly. The Council has provided a budget and has appropriated funds for acquisition of property needed for the Grant Tower project. While we have worked, and will continue to work toward the acquisition of property on a willing-seller basis, there are several critical parcels whose timely acquisition may require use of the City's Eminent Domain authority. This memorandum provides background information and accompanying materials to support a briefing to the City Council in Executive Session. I have requested that this session be scheduled for the September 5, 2006 Council meeting. At that meeting I would also like to ask the Council to set a date of September 21 for a public hearing on the proposed eminent domain actions, and to consider adoption of six resolutions (one for each property owner) authorizing the Administration to commence eminent domain proceedings on those parcels. It is important to note that the initiation of the eminent domain process does not bind the City to actually condemning any of the subject properties. It merely allows us to start the process of providing official notifications to the property owners, and filing papers with the court. We will continue attempting to reach a negotiated purchase price with the property owners, and if we do reach such agreement, we can halt the eminent domain process on that parcel easily and immediately. The following materials are provided with this memorandum: 1. Memo from City Attorney's Office describing the eminent domain process. 2. Copies of the proposed resolutions for each parcel or set of parcels. 3. Maps showing the location and boundaries of the affected parcels 4. Table showing the ownership, address, and status of each parcel regarding appraised values and amounts offered. 451 SOUTH STATE STREET,ROOM 306,SALT LAKE CITY,UTAH 84111 TELEPHONE:801-535-7704 FAX:801-535-6331 wwwslcgov.com Background: While we are making some progress with the acquisition of properties for the Grant Tower project, we soon need to initiate the process for acquiring the properties by eminent domain to obtain possession of some of the critical parcels in time for construction. Our Property Management Division has been working with land owners for many months now, and we have secured appraisals and made offers on all of the relevant properties. As might be expected, however, some property owners disagree with our appraisals, and in a few cases, have requested a second appraisal. We are working with the State Property Rights Ombudsman's Office to facilitate this process (under which the City must also pay for the second appraisal), and we will make every effort to acquire properties on a "willing seller" basis. Nevertheless, the construction schedule calls for a very carefully-timed sequence of construction phases, beginning as early as December. Because that time is rapidly approaching, and because we have not yet been able to reach an agreement with the owners of several critical parcels, we have no choice but to begin the process of condemning those properties. The eminent domain process contains several timing and notice requirements which necessitate that we initiate this process now to ensure we can occupy the needed properties in time for construction to begin. We have every intention of being fair with all of the property owners, and we will continue to attempt a negotiated purchase of their properties. Our hands are somewhat tied, however, by the appraisals we have received, all of which calculate a value significantly lower than property owners are currently willing to accept. If we succeed if reaching an agreement with owners for the purchase of their properties, we can always back away from the eminent domain process. For those businesses that will need to be relocated, we are going beyond what is required, and doing what we can to help owners find parcels to which to relocate their businesses. In fact, one of the parcels we may need to condemn is actually for the purpose of relocating two of the businesses. In this case, the property is currently for sale, and we have made two nearly full-price offers on the property, only to have our offers rejected and the asking price increased. Another of the parcels we would like to use for the relocation of a business is currently owned by the Salt Lake City Redevelopment Agency. We are working with RDA staff to determine how much of the parcel will be needed for the planned extension of Eccles Avenue to 600 West, and how much will remain and could be used as a relocation site for Mr. Young's studio. In total, we are considering condemnation of up to seven parcels or groups of parcels. We have sent notices to 6 property owners: 5 to property owners whose businesses need to be relocated because their entire parcels are needed for the project, and one to the owners of the parcel that will provide a new home for two of the CONFIDENTIAL Grant Tower Property Acquisition Page 2 of 3 businesses. The seventh property owner is Rocky Mountain Power. Because of ongoing negotiations with Rocky Mountain Power, we have not yet sent a notice on their parcel, but we believe we may need to initiate the eminent domain process at a later date if negotiations do not produce results soon. Although there are approximately 30 parcels that will be affected by this project, in the majority of cases, we only need a small portion of the parcel. Right now, we do not foresee any major difficulties in acquiring these portions. Conclusion: While we still hope to avoid using eminent domain entirely, we must initiate the process now, or risk not being able to acquire the required parcels in time for construction. It is possible that the mere threat of condemnation will help us resolve some of the disputes over property value and lead to agreements on an appropriate purchase prices for some or all of the needed parcels. We have made it clear to the property owners that we are interested in continuing to negotiate a fair purchase price, and will make every effort to secure the properties on a willing seller basis. CONFIDENTIAL Grant Tower Property Acquisition Page 3 of 3 CONFIDENTIAL ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGED MEMORANDUM To: Salt Lake City Council From: Larry V. Spendlove, Senior City Attorney Date: August 28, 2006 Re: Eminent Domain Procedure The purpose of this memorandum is to give you a brief summary of the process involved in a Utah municipality's exercising its power of eminent domain. The procedure required is exclusively governed by state statutes. Under the statutes, the procedure may be separated into two aspects, the extra-judicial process and the judicial process. Extrajudicial process 1. This process involves action by the City in negotiating with an owner of property which may be the subject of condemnation. The City has the responsibility of fairly negotiating with the owner in an effort to purchase the properties at a price agreed upon between the parties. If there is a disagreement as to the value of the property the City may obtain a professional appraisal in a further effort to obtain an amicable purchase. The City also has a duty to advise the owner of the owner's rights with regard to relocating any existing business on the premises and of the right to obtain the assistance of the State Property Rights Ombudsman in these regards. 2. If no amicable resolution is reached, the governing body of the municipality, statutorily defined as the City's legislative body, must formally approve the City's taking of the property following a public hearing on such proposal. The owner must be given the opportunity to be heard at the hearing regarding the proposed taking of his/her property. 3. Certain notices are required to be given to the owner in accordance with specified timelines. a. A 14-day notice (under Utah Code Ann. §78-34-4.5 as amended) explaining the owner's rights to negotiation, mediation, arbitration, and assistance of the ombudsman. It must advise the owner that any oral representations or promises made during the negotiation process are not binding upon the person seeking to acquire the property by eminent domain. That notice must be given at least 14 days before the City Council hearing to finally approve the filing of the eminent domain action. 1 b. A 10-business-day notice (UCA §78-34-4(2) as amended) notifying the owner of the date, time and place of the City Council hearing at which a proposed resolution approving the filing of an action may be passed and advising the owner that he/she will be given an opportunity to be heard on the proposed taking at the hearing. c. A 90-day notice (UCA §57-12-13) advising of the date on which the owner must vacate the property. The statute is silent as to whether or not that notice may be given prior to the Council hearing and passing of the resolution. The safer approach is to give it immediately following the passing of the resolution. 4. The enacting of the resolution approving the taking under eminent domain concludes the City Council's responsibilities in the process. Since, by statute, the resolution is to be passed by the legislative body and is not a joint resolution with the executive, the Mayor does not participate in the hearing or in the passing of the resolution. The Mayor's role in this process is to direct and oversee the actions of the City employees carrying out the functions of negotiating with the owners and ensuring that the property transfers are properly handled. The mayor's role also extends into the judicial process in the sense that he is to effectuate the City Council's directive as set forth in the resolution to pursue condemnation as may be necessary including appropriate litigation. Judicial Process 5. Immediately following the passing of the City Council resolution a complaint may be filed in the Third District Court for condemnation of the property under the eminent domain power of the City. Concurrent with the filing of the complaint, the City files a motion for immediate occupancy of the premises. A hearing on the motion is generally heard within 30 to 60 days following filing of the motion. 6. At the hearing on the City's motion, the Court may issue an order granting the City the right to take immediate possession of the disputed property while reserving for later determination the dollar amount that the City is to pay to the owner for the taking. The City may immediately begin demolition and otherwise use the subject property for the public use approved in the City Council resolution. 7. Even if an order granting immediate occupancy is issued by the Court, the City may not take possession of the property until 90 days have elapsed since the giving of the 90-day notice referred to above, unless the Court reduces that period. However, the 90- day notice requirement does not apply to a vacant parcel where there is no residence, business or faint to relocate. Therefore, in the instance of a vacant parcel, occupancy would be taken by the City immediately upon issuance of the Court's order of immediate occupancy. 8. Negotiations between the City and the owner may continue during all of the processes described above, and an amicable resolution may yet be accomplished which 2 would then terminate the process at whatever stage it may have reached prior to settlement. Executive Session 9. In accordance with the Utah Open and Public Meetings Act (UCA §52-4-5(1) (a) (iv)) a closed meeting may be held by the City Council at a strategy session to discuss the purchase ...of real property when public discussion of the transaction would disclose the appraisal or estimated value of the property under consideration or prevent the public body from completing the transaction on the best possible terms. With regard to a public hearing on a proposed resolution regarding the taking of property by eminent domain, only those discussions that would fall within the parameters of§52-4-5 should be conducted in an executive session. 1\s14801,Forms\Memorandum to City Council rc eminent domain process 8-28-06 clean 3 THE CITY OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH A Municipal Corporation Resolution No. A RESOLUTION INITIATING EMINENT DOMAIN PROCEEDINGS Whereas, the City of Salt Lake City, Utah, a municipal corporation and political subdivision of the State of Utah, is authorized to acquire private property for public use through the exercise of eminent domain; and Whereas, the City of Salt Lake City desires to facilitate and enable the removal and realignment of freight railroad tracks from the 900 South rail line and from the Folsom Street Rail Corridor to improve the safety and efficiency of the rail lines, decrease noise, vibration, pollution and interference with residential neighborhoods, improve traffic circulation, enable the creation of public spaces, assist in relocating existing businesses, and otherwise provide for the health, safety and welfare (the "Public Use and Purposes"); and Whereas, the City has determined that certain parcels of land and associated structures must be acquired and cleared to accommodate the Public Use and Purposes; and Whereas, the City has extended an offer to the property owner to purchase the property which is the subject of this resolution for its market value; and Whereas, the City desires to acquire the property described below through the exercise of its power of eminent domain for the Public Use and Purposes including without limitation, facilitating the freight track relocation away from the residential area along 900 South Street, thereby enabling the abandoning of existing tracks on 900 South in order to eliminate noise and other health, safety and welfare concerns of that neighborhood; ensure more rapid and smooth movement of freight trains through the City; improve traffic safety and circulation, assist in relocating existing businesses, and reduce automobile pollution; and for other public purposes; NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH: Section 1. The Salt Lake City Council finds and determines that the public interest and necessity require the acquisition and the immediate occupancy of the parcel of real estate located in Salt Lake County and identified as parcel number 08-35-458-023, for the Public Use and Purposes described above, and for other lawful and legitimate public uses and purposes. 1 Section 2. The property to be affected by the action taken in Section 1, above, is owned by: R & R Center, LLC. The affected property is located at approximately 3 North 800 West in Salt Lake City, Salt Lake County, Utah. Section 3. The proposed location of the realigned tracks is planned and located in a manner that will be most compatible with the greatest public good and the least private injury. Section 4. The Mayor and the City Attorney are directed, on behalf of the City: 1. To acquire, in the name of the City, fee interest in the properties as set forth herein, by purchase if a reasonable purchase price can be negotiated, or by eminent domain proceedings in accordance with Utah law. 2. To prepare and prosecute such proceeding or proceedings in the proper court having jurisdiction thereof as is necessary for such acquisition. 3. To obtain from the court an order permitting the City to take immediate possession and use of said real property and easements affecting said real property, for the purposes herein described. 4. To use the services of outside counsel as necessary to accomplish these directives. Section 5. This resolution shall take effect immediately. Adopted by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah this day of September, 2006. SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL By CHAIRPERSON ATTEST: CHIEF DEPUTY CITY RECORDER APPROVED AS TO TOW W1 Safi Lelke `Gi . A .rneyt Otfiee gate By-'<. 2 THE CITY OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH A Municipal Corporation Resolution No. A RESOLUTION INITIATING EMINENT DOMAIN PROCEEDINGS Whereas, the City of Salt Lake City, Utah, a municipal corporation and political subdivision of the State of Utah, is authorized to acquire private property for public use through the exercise of eminent domain; and Whereas, the City of Salt Lake City desires to facilitate and enable the removal and realignment of freight railroad tracks from the 900 South rail line and from the Folsom Street Rail Corridor to improve the safety and efficiency of the rail lines, decrease noise, vibration, pollution and interference with residential neighborhoods, improve traffic circulation, enable the creation of public spaces, and otherwise provide for the health, safety and welfare (the "Public Use and Purposes"); and Whereas, the City has determined that certain parcels of land and associated structures must be acquired and cleared to accommodate the Public Use and Purposes; and Whereas, the City has obtained appraisals of these parcels and associated improvements, and has extended offers to the property owners to purchase the properties for its market value, as indicated by the appraisal; and Whereas, the City desires to acquire the property described below through the exercise of its power of eminent domain for the Public Use and Purposes including without limitation, facilitating the freight track relocation away from the residential area along 900 South Street, thereby enabling the abandoning of existing tracks on 900 South in order to eliminate noise and other health, safety and welfare concerns of that neighborhood; ensuring more rapid and smooth movement of freight trains through the City; improve traffic safety and circulation, and reduce automobile pollution; and for other public purposes; NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH: Section 1. The Salt Lake City Council finds and determines that the public interest and necessity require the acquisition and the immediate occupancy of the parcel of real estate located in Salt Lake County, State of Utah and identified as parcel number 15-02-228-001, for the Public Use and Purposes described above, and for other lawful and legitimate public uses and purposes. 1 Section 2. The property to be affected by the action taken in Section 1, above, is owned by: Terry Nish. The affected property is located at approximately 761 West South Temple in Salt Lake City, Salt Lake County, Utah. Section 3. The proposed location of the realigned tracks is planned and located in a manner that will be most compatible with the greatest public good and the least private injury. Section 4. The Mayor and the City Attorney are directed, on behalf of the City: 1. To acquire, in the name of the City, fee interest in the properties as set forth herein,by purchase if a reasonable purchase price can be negotiated, or by eminent domain proceedings in accordance with Utah law. 2. To prepare and prosecute such proceeding or proceedings in the proper court having jurisdiction thereof as is necessary for such acquisition. 3. To obtain from the court an order permitting the City to take immediate possession and use of said real property and easements affecting said real property, for the purposes herein described. 4. To use the services of outside counsel as necessary to accomplish these directives. Section 5. This resolution shall take effect immediately. Adopted by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah this day of September, 2006. SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL By CHAIRPERSON ATTEST: CHIEF DEPUTY CITY RECORDER APPROVED AS TO FORM Salt Lake City Attorneys Office Date sy , THE CITY OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH A Municipal Corporation Resolution No. A RESOLUTION INITIATING EMINENT DOMAIN PROCEEDINGS Whereas, the City of Salt Lake City, Utah, a municipal corporation and political subdivision of the State of Utah, is authorized to acquire private property for public use through the exercise of eminent domain; and Whereas, the City of Salt Lake City desires to facilitate and enable the removal and realignment of freight railroad tracks from the 900 South rail line and from the Folsom Street Rail Corridor to improve the safety and efficiency of the rail lines, decrease noise, vibration, pollution and interference with residential neighborhoods, improve traffic circulation, enable the creation of public spaces, and otherwise provide for the health, safety and welfare (the "Public Use and Purposes"); and Whereas, the City has determined that certain parcels of land and associated structures must be acquired and cleared to accommodate the Public Use and Purposes; and Whereas, the City has obtained appraisals of these parcels and associated improvements, and has extended offers to the property owners to purchase the properties for its market value, as indicated by the appraisal; and Whereas, the City desires to acquire the property described below through the exercise of its power of eminent domain for the Public Use and Purposes including without limitation, facilitating the freight track relocation away from the residential area along 900 South Street, thereby enabling the abandoning of existing tracks on 900 South in order to eliminate noise and other health, safety and welfare concerns of that neighborhood; ensuring more rapid and smooth movement of freight trains through the City; improve traffic safety and circulation, and reduce automobile pollution; and for other public purposes; NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH: Section 1. The Salt Lake City Council finds and determines that the public interest and necessity require the acquisition and the immediate occupancy of the parcel of real estate located in Salt Lake County, State of Utah and identified as parcel number 15-02-227-003, for the Public Use and Purposes described above, and for other lawful and legitimate public uses and purposes. 1 Section 2. The property to be affected by the action taken in Section 1, above, is owned by: Grand Staircase, Inc.. The affected property is located at approximately 767 West South Temple Street in Salt Lake City, Salt Lake County, Utah. Section 3. The proposed location of the realigned tracks is planned and located in a manner that will be most compatible with the greatest public good and the least private injury. Section 4. The Mayor and the City Attorney are directed, on behalf of the City: 1. To acquire, in the name of the City, fee interest in the properties as set forth herein, by purchase if a reasonable purchase price can be negotiated, or by eminent domain proceedings in accordance with Utah law. 2. To prepare and prosecute such proceeding or proceedings in the proper court having jurisdiction thereof as is necessary for such acquisition. 3. To obtain from the court an order permitting the City to take immediate possession and use of said real property and easements affecting said real property, for the purposes herein described. 4. To use the services of outside counsel as necessary to accomplish these directives. Section 5. This resolution shall take effect immediately. Adopted by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah this day of September, 2006. SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL By CHAIRPERSON ATTEST: CHIEF DEPUTY CITY RECORDER APPROVED AS TO FORM Salt Lake 9ity Attorneys Woe Office Date 873 �-3cx,^( By '44/15-- « 2 THE CITY OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH A Municipal Corporation Resolution No. A RESOLUTION INITIATING EMINENT DOMAIN PROCEEDINGS Whereas, the City of Salt Lake City, Utah, a municipal corporation and political subdivision of the State of Utah, is authorized to acquire private property for public use through the exercise of eminent domain; and Whereas, the City of Salt Lake City desires to facilitate and enable the removal and realignment of freight railroad tracks from the 900 South rail line and from the Folsom Street Rail Corridor to improve the safety and efficiency of the rail lines, decrease noise, vibration, pollution and interference with residential neighborhoods, improve traffic circulation, enable the creation of public spaces, and otherwise provide for the health, safety and welfare (the "Public Use and Purposes"); and Whereas, the City has deteiniined that certain parcels of land and associated structures must be acquired and cleared to accommodate the Public Use and Purposes; and Whereas, the City has obtained appraisals of these parcels and associated improvements, and has extended offers to the property owners to purchase the properties for its market value, as indicated by the appraisal; and Whereas, the City desires to acquire the property described below through the exercise of its power of eminent domain for the Public Use and Purposes including without limitation, facilitating the freight track relocation away from the residential area along 900 South Street, thereby enabling the abandoning of existing tracks on 900 South in order to eliminate noise and other health, safety and welfare concerns of that neighborhood; ensuring more rapid and smooth movement of freight trains through the City; improve traffic safety and circulation, and reduce automobile pollution; and for other public purposes; NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH: Section 1. The Salt Lake City Council finds and determines that the public interest and necessity require the acquisition and the immediate occupancy of the parcels of real estate located in Salt Lake County, State of Utah and identified as parcels numbered 15-02-227-001 and 15-02-227-002, for the Public Use and Purposes described above, and for other lawful and legitimate public uses and purposes. 1 Section 2. The property to be affected by the action taken in Section 1, above, is owned by: Jason Broschinsky. The affected property is located at approximately 779/799 West South Temple and 777 West South Temple Streets respectively in Salt Lake City, Salt Lake County, Utah. Section 3. The proposed location of the realigned tracks is planned and located in a manner that will be most compatible with the greatest public good and the least private injury. Section 4. The Mayor and the City Attorney are directed, on behalf of the City: 1. To acquire, in the name of the City, fee interest in the properties as set forth herein, by purchase if a reasonable purchase price can be negotiated, or by eminent domain proceedings in accordance with Utah law. 2. To prepare and prosecute such proceeding or proceedings in the proper court having jurisdiction thereof as is necessary for such acquisition. 3. To obtain from the court an order peuiiitting the City to take immediate possession and use of said real property and easements affecting said real property, for the purposes herein described. 4. To use the services of outside counsel as necessary to accomplish these directives. Section 5. This resolution shall take effect immediately. Adopted by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah this day of September, 2006. SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL By CHAIRPERSON ATTEST: CHIEF DEPUTY CITY RECORDER A- HOVLU AS TO FORM Salt Lake Ci Attorneys Office Data 0 }- 60 ", Bar 7 THE CITY OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH A Municipal Corporation Resolution No. A RESOLUTION INITIATING EMINENT DOMAIN PROCEEDINGS Whereas, the City of Salt Lake City, Utah, a municipal corporation and political subdivision of the State of Utah, is authorized to acquire private property for public use through the exercise of eminent domain; and Whereas, the City of Salt Lake City desires to facilitate and enable the removal and realignment of freight railroad tracks from the 900 South rail line and from the Folsom Street Rail Corridor to improve the safety and efficiency of the rail lines, decrease noise, vibration, pollution and interference with residential neighborhoods, improve traffic circulation, enable the creation of public spaces, and otherwise provide for the health, safety and welfare (the "Public Use and Purposes"); and Whereas, the City has determined that certain parcels of land and associated structures must be acquired and cleared to accommodate the Public Use and Purposes; and Whereas, the City has obtained appraisals of these parcels and associated improvements, and has extended offers to the property owners to purchase the properties for its market value, as indicated by the appraisal; and Whereas, the City desires to acquire the property described below through the exercise of its power of eminent domain for the Public Use and Purposes including without limitation, facilitating the freight track relocation away from the residential area along 900 South Street, thereby enabling the abandoning of existing tracks on 900 South in order to eliminate noise and other health, safety and welfare concerns of that neighborhood; ensuring more rapid and smooth movement of freight trains through the City; improve traffic safety and circulation, and reduce automobile pollution; and for other public purposes; NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH: Section 1. The Salt Lake City Council finds and determines that the public interest and necessity require the acquisition and the immediate occupancy of the parcels of real estate located in Salt Lake County, State of Utah and identified as parcels numbered 15-02-228-003, 15-02-228-004, and 15-02-228-005 for the Public Use and Purposes described above, and for other lawful and legitimate public uses and purposes. 1 Section 2. The property to be affected by the action taken in Section 1, above, is owned by: Knox Investment, LTD. The affected property is located at approximately 741 West South Temple, 741 West South Temple, and 721 West South Temple Streets respectively in Salt Lake City, Salt Lake County, Utah. Section 3. The proposed location of the realigned tracks is planned and located in a manner that will be most compatible with the greatest public good and the least private injury. Section 4. The Mayor and the City Attorney are directed, on behalf of the City: 1. To acquire, in the name of the City, fee interest in the properties as set forth herein, by purchase if a reasonable purchase price can be negotiated, or by eminent domain proceedings in accordance with Utah law. 2. To prepare and prosecute such proceeding or proceedings in the proper court having jurisdiction thereof as is necessary for such acquisition. 3. To obtain from the court an order permitting the City to take immediate possession and use of said real property and easements affecting said real property, for the purposes herein described. 4. To use the services of outside counsel as necessary to accomplish these directives. Section 5. This resolution shall take effect immediately. Adopted by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah this day of September, 2006. SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL By CHAIRPERSON ATTEST: APPROVED AS 70 FORM CHIEF DEPUTY CITY RECORDER Salt Lake City Attorneys Office Date ?7>c 90 6 By 2 • r NI..,. O N J O) fnl.--f WIN (T CT (T (T(T [T A A A A A A A N AO CO CO CO CO CO CO CC71 A W N-•CO CO CO CO v l T(J1J1 A WIN NO (O 0o J O CT A W N O • 01 A CO N O CD CO J(A CT A W D 1 1 CO, (0 0D J'I on A co N Z z Z 1Z 0 Z co N IZ Z C),�''m IC���i� (7 I'� m Into�m o Io,m I'o o m ot0 m o m 'o to fD o o (D 0 0 00 0 D 10 I0 I0 0 0 7 -O 00 9 J �� 7 N O O Icaca C' D D. 'Dill D,D D D D D D D :(1)la a' (D lla al (n Dnla �'a,a'. (n'n 0.'" a1 a0- a a1a! a a s a a1a', a a 0. d n''n a n dI6 3 n (D 3 O. (D O'y 1 (D (n (0n ((D O N 0 (fin N I (D OO D) (D 0 CD CT C-13 y (D 10 0 0 y 0 `I-1 0 (Nn (D O y 1 o1 w..w x 01 CD -.1J J(__' J1.�' - - J J G) - 0),J CD - J J —a'.J C cT A 'AI - p��3 C) (T J'. (DC (T N m. (T•O)O)CD 00 A CT 7 (, 7 •w!Z ZIW '4N N.,CO •�I-410,g JJN 01(T'J,N OA O W1O O OO O'C<Ox 10 CJOC (aOO COIN) SO OO j0 O N N .k N�'* N'.<< N < < (p 'N NI 7 N(D CD'_ N�(n < Nm'w '(T -• �..X C I N *, 7 N(ir*(1 2 Z r)co(D (D 'D N(D (D 7 N(D (D 7 ).(up, (D 'A SIS CD (,Jm.(D',Q. N(D (DHp7 N.N'(DIW N (D.VJ N(0INm N� -. O N^ N. -.IN CT (D 0'CD (T 5.w Q. N'(n 1(.'O , (1)(1)O J.W^ DC CD^ cn S 0' �1(„1 coCD(P CD 6I Cn'�Cn'.Cn (P IIOO7 Wn � J(n!(nm (nCnN O:WI(n pi tn(n. p(n'fn(D OCO 60O1 o1O O � p 0CC'O(p OSO � p0 O'�p0 co 0, OOG OO,CI OC Cif O.S.C'r3D A'C j� ry OTC C 3 W I,C'CD CD r OIf0O IC ICD ''!34 SII 7 N S S17• W.(11i S.(ND _'3-13-'. N S1S N W Sim 'S S 7 S S'7 rn�N r 11 CD- 'C'CD CD CD< O CD 17 I(D 1'OD (D (D.r 3 (D m CDIN co (D O m O o o 0 m',30 33'� 331 Io 3a 133 33n m'3 a a '333a (n 1(D(O CD co (D CD 1 *2 (D CD (D (D CD 1� N j(D r ' CD O 1 OI 1 11(o (1) 0 Cn CO o r, Co a 1 r r 1 I C0I 11 C0)'.. = C). C) coo. n p' •0. co y AI ? A co '1A Al- A A' "J r Z . O I 'i -1 o I 0' 1 00 10 01 1 ! 0 92. ' as �1 o CO 0 m1 0 O -C ° 1 r 7 N_2 (T 1 J 1 W 0 1 co N I N N -O S C) 7 C (D (A co, 0) 1 - O fTl 0 Cot 1 1 O O co T1 J_ ( (T O 01 01 0) 7 N 0N 0 (p O 0 A 3 0 1 > 1 of a a - 1 - n .C�. 3 O N O 1 (NJ1 CNJ1 ;0 Nj D v1 fin 1�,'O W •N N •N N co o 71 ryr-- IN O j N o o O O N Col o O ' 1 1 1 '0 ' 00) 0 1 0 0 C,y O a a °1 0 Z7 ON O,N c0.1..) O'.N O N lit 0) N O N O.N N 0 (0 1 (0 11(.0 a, 00 11 0 on 1 N (T N 'N •N 01 N (n N (n N ((1 N °0 1 N V1 N C)' !('� 1(n o N ; A it A co •A 9' A W A (b ,p A (P A (P A V Q .Z7 (T N (n N (T N 'i N.O rs, ''N O N 1 C. N O N o N O O O N O N O N O N N O W I O W O W�p WHO W,O W O W O W O (., (n N 7 I`�y1, .-.� N A m 1 p I(T co on J co, V 1(T A.(T W (T N 1N (T O (n (D N �11I to, 1 • I 69 N 'N I N IN O N ° O N 3. ..0 CD .1I, .I 3k m N N 'N N m m A (n (D _ a (D Zl Zl .Z1 N 0 U -. N -. N N 0 CT (n ,N d I< 1 1 ar N 'O_ m,, m CTl 1 1 0 D" o O o (n 1 11 0 CO O O 7J!d T, .- ._ N 1 to o o m o w o q1 rn < < O. rn (T T (D O 0) w a) O a) O 1 O O O O O • co O • O p i O, O O O } b T y 69 69 11 69 69 6.4 0' 1 1 O 1 I N SD) O N A Q 'A A A I Q A � 'in- N O jN O. .N N i (n (l � nN •A N N1 O (OT1 An J Oj 1 V cri N p 1 GV 1 O 0 , O O Im 0- a I m 0 p 0) CZrn o W D(fl O o VJ 1 n 0 O CD 0 o (D(o w (m) o o (� < al , o -° 3 nm 0 > > -o o m a (C o 0 m aomO°- oa I 0 �1 oc y 0 w' 1 'I1 o y m m a co x O rn o m m 1 m p1 o a o O p1 w n m W III' -oo D n y a v O 3 J N w N V 0 00. C N N ,(D (0T C� O W O fD a p d N (D N O o O O N 0 m o m o < a m m o _?0 31 A O N n 0 O S 0 CJ O O S O 0 O O a O 7@ 3 • ,, 7 0 < (D(D 6 7 0 ° (� 7. °o p 3 (D `° 3 o yj m Ncol,- FA(O - 17 N D 0 `� m o '0' z, 1 3 v 0 o o C oo° D I 1! c (C o (A 7 0 W Z (D O 9l.N W C C1'i O I 1 D O O _ -i N O 7 1 Z F fli 0 C) g o y '< O o . . 1 I i 1 ..., • • E >,..., _ . I H . .i -,-• — -- — • 1 ti, 4 k.',4-'11,- . ir, frig r n'jZ r nra g r-- ,,,,,, rr:::: M '4., . 4... I , •T 8: 0>Ill Cri : ' I i . ...mZx —1," ..,.1 I Z.c.3 M 1 1, :, ',. „, . ,... .. ni?3-< • ' A 1 k, I I .../ 4 . ii K_. T le 3.i • -. A 1 - -71 4 • ' i 4.. iii , . 4 ... \-.) 417 ra , _.:, • ,. 4 it , _ • "'" , Ilk I 11 w ' ,my.. - . ( I I .i..,. T , • i., . . i.LiI .. .,. 1 . M ' 1 _ .... cil.... ;,-. .1 .. 2.z..,- J2 Z r 1 i ka 1 til 11 1 1 lio t•k ,4 -1-- ....-- 1114 M Q .1 . ,,i- ,....., : .. , ,.... . L ____ 1 1 , _ ID ., , , -,r,. .,.„..„.... - ..: - ,,, to . , . . .. . ..- -,',-1 I .. , ,1,-. , - ,,,,, .t —i —111117,0 IIIIi... t 1. — .,, : ..,- — ----- ----..lot ,, .g 55 0 >>Z 0 0 P A 14 4.:', -...........- 1 ' 4, .... m ›m III t a 0 co in -1-1 d c2 CD 71:-..- 7, I to xi•-X • i ,i. • ...____ v — -_; ._.., . __ X g . -.-__ _ ...,, • r Nc. I ..,, $ Jr I I ---... -; . .-k. It& <_. . .di ... al m R,' . .2 ,, .., . Cn* 1 i a Ai l' - • ' i i I i t . , ., -— , ) 1 s " I 1 , • . ..1, . i' jaA ....,,1 .., I 'r - '..,t ' i I I ,"t .1 1 I O. , - 01 fl f(, [ . i i I ii: : • ri , 1 ,_ ,, ,,, ,,,,, 4' , 1: 1 C 4 ii I f- — - riLl_Lfi la 1-= ?:3 , .,._ r.,..t±,L, ill ir 1,'f. k 1...7 41 1 11 I 11' I i --..-___1_2! -,, a i ._ .... , "...---- - \ \i it: T, 1 1 _. j. L Ii_ ___ - 1 . I _-",--1 /III)1\\ 1111 -, - ' - Itt•'1"mitr71 1 1 ": f-, -4." . - - T I' , *.- L,..,.: 1 ,": ,• , 1' -,7`..-•-•7'-'11, 1 f- - -1.1 ir Z CL • ' ' • 113 • • I 1 ! I 1 d c'2 I '4 ti ‘'°— . '0 1•• I s 1 t*i ' 1 ! A ul , — • II: 1 kl•)' 1,111' 1 1 ••/-j_ 1 ' ' 'It - I , z ()' + — — .I ! ( —P) ''* ' '" --j - irilli'l 0 - - t4 i I I I 1, ,< \ 1 , . , 1 \ . I I e'" _44- I I 7 *. - •-- i 1 I -i- I CD1 g f ji1,, --i-- i.. co ip- .. . _ .1_i _ ± I . 70S'',:• \ __I V---4-j--It I ir•, I ... ,3 e..3 i 1 , i 1 3 li I 1,..11 . I I MI :"; r - -I . r I , ......._ I 1 1 O 15:12., 7 $) — / /t-,!.-- d_. L'il$ --o ,4x.- -.. .—. .. , ...o .... 1-- , . i .7,...,.......,.:„...........„.„ ..,..... ';'',.'"`,''`is-'.'_•1',1.4441.111v410 Nil ,......_. ...4..„,. ...- ._ J - ,„a #7•4 .--- -__ i ('" ai II Ortiji" l"21 I cP -- -_ I -'T Z=30 3- 1 •4 1 , . — - --5.-- __ - ... -,.................:...._ . . ___1 (, o7-4 _,.. ____ I ...1., •' - " 4-i--...:- ' , * -• ..- - !. '5'''. il 1 • i ! - 4 ,.. , s • . . . c• I i—r 1 i . -1 10 ' — f 1 1 I L ii 1 i! ilstittii—T, ---F- , t 4..1. ; 170-_4 ej"...'441-1 :'--11-- ed ..., 1 1 I ' I I 11-1 1---T-1: -II 1 !,i ,--Tir- -1 , I 1 ' c - - 1, It,•• L 1; - I. I' fl I ,__ 1 I I i j ' 1---' - 1.-- -1 -,-1 ,,,(i.ilf:- __Li 1 ' 1 , - no, 112 . ' .1 II I , ,-_./ ?1, 1 I e -ti- n .1 t ( '574 . _ _ _ _H i 1 1 61 1 '''-' -1-- --.- 11- .. 1 i' 1 1. I li 2--1- -Ile i i , • . 1 II 1 3. 'e 1 1 r. . ; 4147- 4 1--- :-- -i. .0 J lk, • ,,, ,... nil _•1 .. ..., t . _.. , MEMORANDUM DATE: September 19, 2006 TO: City Council Members FROM: Russell Weeks RE: Briefing: Building and Maintaining Bus Shelters CC: Cindy Gust-Jenson, Rocky Fluhart, Louis Zunguze, Ed Rutan, Brent Wilde, DJ Baxter, Alex Ikefuna, Doug Dansie, Boyd Ferguson, Jennifer Bruno, Janice Jardine This memorandum pertains to the Administration's interest in discussing with the full City Council having a private company build and maintain bus shelters in Salt Lake City. A company would make a profit by allowing advertising on the shelters it builds. The Administration has submitted a memorandum in connection with the issue, but it is seeking City Council direction on initiating a petition for an ordinance to allow bus shelters and related signage, according to the Administration memorandum. The Administration also would like City Council direction on initiating a request for proposals from companies to build and maintain bus shelters. A key issue for the discussion appears to be: Who should build and maintain bus shelters? City ordinances do not prohibit bus shelters, but only 77 of the 1,612 bus stops in the City have shelters. The Administration estimates that it costs between$2,000 and $15,000 to build a bus shelter and between$500 and $30,000 to maintain one. The Administration estimates that if a$5,000 shelter were built at each of the 1,535 bus stops that have no shelters, it would cost $7.67 million to build them. If it cost $2,500 a year to maintain each of those shelters, it would cost $4.19 million to maintain them all. According to the Administration memorandum, "Clearly, the installation and maintenance of bus shelters is an expense that UTA has not been able to fund, and it would be a major expense for the City to assume."I According to the memorandum, Midvale, Ogden, Provo, Roy, South Salt Lake, Sunset, Taylorsville, West Valley City, and Salt Lake County have contracted with private companies to install and maintain bus shelters. The companies' revenues come from advertising on the bus shelters. 1 Administration research has deteiiiiined that bus shelters in cities that have contracted with private firms to build and maintain shelters generally are well- designed and maintained. The research found that, typically, advertising on shelters consists of 4-foot by 6-foot signs at each end of the shelters.2 I Please see Page 2. 2 Please see Page 3. 2 AUG 1 8 2006 004000 Communication to the City Council s,,,, ,„K, �De ment of Community Development To: Rocky Fluhart, Chief Administrative Officer Office of the Director From: Louis Zunguze, Community Development Directo Date: August 15, 2006 CC: Brent Wilde, Community Development Deputy Director DJ Baxter, Senior Advisor to the Mayor Re: Bus Shelters Issue Origin and Policy Implications: The lack of bus shelters in Salt Lake City is an issue of continuing discussion among many City residents, City Administration, and Utah Transit Authority(UTA)staff. Regular bus riders(particularly riders with disabilities) express concern with having to brave a snow storm or the heat of a summer day to wait for a bus and indicate such difficulties are a deterrent to their utilizing the bus system. Given the strong policy direction being pursued by both the Administration and City Council to ensure that the City's neighborhoods have accessible and convenient facilities to support walkablility and public transportation, it is desirable that options to provide more bus shelters be considered. UTA has approximately 8,000 bus stops system wide. There are 1,612 bus stops in Salt Lake City but only 77 bus shelters. In response to ongoing discussions, the Administration has investigated options for increasing the number of bus shelters in the City. Financial Implications and Funding Options: The cost to install and maintain a bus shelter is substantial, not only for the initial installation but for ongoing maintenance. Costs vary greatly, depending on the size and style of shelter, the amount of concrete work required, and related variables. Shelter installation costs range from $2,000 to $15,000. Annual maintenance expenses range from $500 to $30,000, depending upon the location, amount of use, extent of vandalism, and quality of the shelter. As the means of putting these costs into perspective, if a bus shelter were installed at 1,535 bus stops in Salt Lake City(1,612 bus stops less the 77 exiting shelters), with a low average cost of$5,000, the total cost would be $7,675,000. If the annual maintenance for each shelter were only$2,500, the overall annual cost would be $4,192,500. Obviously, it is unreasonable to expect that a bus shelter be installed at every stop. Even installing shelters at a more reasonable number of locations exceeds UTA's financial Page 1 capacity, and if UTA were responsible for ongoing maintenance, the cost would reduce resources available for the provision of transit itself. The financial challenge associated with bus shelter installation and maintenance is not unique to Salt Lake City. In response to the desire to provide bus shelters for citizens, many cities are contracting with private companies to install and maintain bus shelters at the company's expense, with revenue to support the costs coming from advertising on the shelter structures. Several cities along the Wasatch Front are currently using private companies to provide bus shelters under such a system, including West Valley City, Taylorsville, South Salt Lake, Provo, Roy, Ogden, Sunset, Salt Lake County, and Midvale. West Jordan and South Jordan are currently pursuing a Request for Proposal process to consider a similar approach to providing bus shelters. If Salt Lake City decides to pursue an agreement with a private company to instigate a program similar to those of the cities mentioned above, the company would likely initiate a program to install 100 to 200 shelters at the busiest stops throughout the City and then assess the program further after evaluating the success of the initial installations. Installation of 100 shelters at cost of$5,000 would total $500,000. Annual maintenance of those 100 shelters at a cost of$2,500 each would total $250,000. Clearly, the installation and maintenance of bus shelters is an expense that UTA has not been able to fund, and it would be a major expense for the City to assume. Issues for the Council to Consider: Issues typically associated with advertising on bus shelters include the following: • Clutter of additional advertising on the streetscape; • First amendment issues associated with bus shelter signage (restricting undesirable advertising); • Shelter signs in residential districts; • Shelter design that is in character with the setting, is responsive to maintenance, and discourages criminal activity; • Competition (a competitor's sign in front of retail business); • Shelter maintenance; • Willingness of the contractor to provide shelters in locations where advertising is less profitable (e.g., low-volume streets or residential areas); and • Interface with City and State law regarding off-premise advertising. City Staff contacted several of the local communities that are contracting with private companies as the means of determining their level of satisfaction with their private bus shelter programs. The general response was positive. Based on Staff research, communication with companies that are in the bus shelter business as well as local municipalities that are contracting for bus shelters, Staff concluded the following: • Bus shelters are generally well designed (cities select their own design and color schemes), well maintained, and issues with graffiti and criminal activity are manageable. Page 2 • Bus shelter companies are sensitive to advertising in residential areas and are willing to locate a small percentage of signs in residential areas without advertising. • Advertising offensive products or the use of messages that are inappropriate, based on predetermined City standards, is also regulated by the private company as defined in the agreement, and thus First Amendment issues are generally not a problem. • Typically, shelter advertising consists of a 4 foot by 6 foot(4'x 6') advertising panel on each end of the shelter. While bus shelter signage does introduce additional commercial advertising along transit corridors, since the size of the signage is limited, the municipalities contacted indicate that the bus shelters tend to blend into the commercial environment and that they do not receive a large number of complaints. • If the City considers a bus shelter agreement, the agreement should specify that shelter advertising shall not be within close proximity with a competitor's business. For example, a bus shelter sign advertising furniture should be required to locate a minimum distance(to be determined), from a competitor's furniture store. • Since Utah State law, as well as City ordinances, regulates the location and spacing of off-premise signs, the potential for conflicts with the off-premise sign industry will likely be an issue. A viable solution for this concern is to define bus shelter signs as a unique type of signage with its own set of regulations that are independent of any other type of sign. Recommendation: Based on this staff analysis and issues associated with the costs of both the initial installation and ongoing maintenance, the Administration would like to brief the Council and request their support to initiate a petition to create an ordinance to allow bus shelters and related signage and support the Administration in initiating an RFP process to select a company to implement a bus shelter program. Page 3 SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT BUDGET ANALYSIS- FISCAL YEAR 2006-07 DATE: September 21, 2006 BUDGET FOR: CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FUND STAFF REPORT BY: Jennifer Bruno, Policy Analyst cc: Rocky Fluhart, Sam Guevara, Louis Zunguze, Luann Clark, Sherrie Collins, Steve Fawcett LIBERTY PARK FOLLOW-UP INFORMATION As requested by the Council, the Administration has provided the Council with follow- up information detailing the Liberty Park Children s Garden improvements costs and other project information (see attached). Currently, there is $500,000 allocated for Liberty Park projects in FY 2007. According to the Administration's recent memo, this would leave the children's garden project$153,000 short. GRANT TOWER/DEBT SERVICE FOLLOW-UP The Administration has discussed with Council Staff, timing for the issuing of bonds for the Grant Tower and Fleet Facility projects. As the proceeds of the bonds for the Fleet Facility project are not needed until January, interest payments can be saved by delaying bonding until this future date. Currently, the Administration has $4 million (allocated by the Council during Budget Amendment #5 in FY 06) with which to proceed with the Grant Tower project until the end of the year. In order to keep the project on schedule however, the Administration would need an additional S400,000 (to cover a necessary utilities contract) before the end of the year- see breakdown below for full list of expenses before the end of the year. This contract would need to be signed before the hearing for Budget Amendment#2 on December 12. Therefore: • One option is for the Council use the $700,000 that is now a placeholder to pay for this contract, and reallocate the remaining funds ($300,000) to other CIP projects. • The remainder of the Grant Tower project costs would then be covered either through a bond or a combination of a bond and fund balance. Council Staff is awaiting exact estimates of debt service amounts given the various bonding scenarios. It is Council Staff's recommendation that the Council decide at the October 3rd Council Meeting whether or not to pursue bonding for the full costs or partial costs (in order to have the bond proceeds by the middle of January, paperwork will need to start in late October/early November). Bond Counsel will be available at this meeting to discuss any questions the Council may have with respect to this issue, and Council Staff will have more detailed information regarding debt service and fund balance for this particular project. 1 Breakdown of Grant Tower-related expenses needed by December 12 Property Acquisition/Demolition/Engineering $3.6 million Contract with Parsons Engineering for entire project $300,000 (partial-total contract$1.1 million) Surveying Costs $100,000 Utilities Contract $400,000 Total Needed by December 12 $4,400,000 ($4m already allocated) The following information was provided previously for the Council Work Session on September 5, 2006. It is provided again for your reference. UPDATE ON MAYOR'S RECOMMENDED FUNDING RECOMMENDATIONS The Mayor has provided the Council with a letter (dated August 20, 2006, see attached), detailing a shift in the funding recommendations for the FY 2007-2008 CIP Budget. The Mayor is recommending shifting the $500,000 that he had previously recommended for Liberty Park, to augment the $400,000 that he had previously recommended for renovations in Pioneer Park. The following are key points regarding this shift: • This funding shift is requested because it was recently communicated to the Administration that the City would not be receiving a $900,000 grant from HUD. The City had planned to use this grant, along with $400,000 in CIP funds, along with $600,000 in private donations, to fund Stage 2 of the Park. The total cost of Stage 2 is estimated at$1.85 million. • The $500,000 that had been recommended for Liberty Park would have funded improvements in the Children's Adventure Playground. In his letter the Mayor states that delaying these improvements for one year will not "...adversely affect the needs of the park..." • Attached to this staff report is a phasing plan for Pioneer Park, provided to Council Staff by the Administration earlier this spring. Stage 1 will be complete (with existing funding) prior to the opening of the 2007 Farmer's Market season. Outstanding Questions: • If the Council chose to allocate the $500,000 recommended for Liberty Park, to Pioneer Park, there would still be a Stage 2 funding gap of approximately $350,000. How does the Administration plan to fill this gap? Is the recommendation to scale back the scope of Stage 2? 2 • Have the $600,000 in "private partnership donations" been secured? If no, how does the Administration plan to address any gap left by a shortfall of private *4014, donations? • What is the Administration's funding plan for Stage 3? UPDATE ON PREVIOUS COUNCIL DECISION • The Council held a briefing on June 1, 2006 to tentatively decide how to proceed with regard to the Mayor's proposal for issuing a sales tax bond for various projects. The following are what the Council tentatively decided: • Fleet Facility - Bond for the full cost of the construction of the new Fleet Facility, but do not bond for the original land cost. The surplus land account will not be paid back out of bond proceeds. Therefore the total amount to be bonded for this project is $21.6 Million. • Grant Tower - Bond only for RDA portion (assuming RDA does not receive a Federal Railroad Administration loan). Council Staff paperwork indicates this amount is$3.1 Million. • Daylighting City Creek @ Folsom Street Corridor and 900 South Rail line right-of-way improvements - The Council tentatively decided to bond for $300,000 worth of soil improvement/erosion control, to qualify the project for bonding as a part of the Grant Tower Railroad Realignment bond. Some Council Members expressed an interest in this project in the future, with continued planning and community involvement. The Euclid Small Area Master Plan (currently under way in the Planning Division), addresses this corridor, and has involved community members and property owners along the corridor. Staff note: At this point these decisions can still be revised as actual bond proceeds have not yet been issued. Pages 6 - 12 have a detailed analysis of the remainder of the projects proposed in the CIP fund for this fiscal year. Council Staff will have the spreadsheet of CIP requests projected for Council Members to discuss in the work session. The following information was provided previously for the Council Work Session on June 1, 2006. It is provided again for your reference. PROPOSED BOND ISSUES IN THE MAYOR'S RECOMMENDED BUDGET FOR CIP The Mayor is recommending a new sales tax bond issue that would have three project components, for a total of$36,380,000: 3 1. Fleet Facility - ($24.3 million) construct a new fleet facility on land previously purchased and for which the bond will reimburse the cost of the land. (note: $3.1 million of this $24.3 million total, is to reimburse the surplus land account. If the Council decided not to reimburse this account, 'and decrease the total bond amount, or dedicate this $3.1 million towards one of the other projects in the bond, there would be approximately $X left in the surplus land account). Staff note - this cost estimate has been revised. The new facility is expected to cost approximately $24.7 million. 2. Grant Tower - ($7.07 million) complete the Grant Tower project (The RDA will contribute payments to the City for their share of the debt service). 3. Daylighting City Creek @ Folsom Street Corridor and 900 South Rail line right-of- way improvements - ($5.05 million) development/daylighting of the Folsom Street/City Creek Parkway, landscaping along the 900 South track line when it is abandoned by UTA A. Debt Service - The total FY 2007 debt service payment would be approximately $1 million, of which the RDA would pay $330,000 (their share of the Grant Tower funding). However, this does not represent the total annual debt service payment as it would technically be a "partial year" by the time the bond was issued. The debt service payment for the remainder of the 20 year loan is anticipated to be an average of$2.77 million per year (see table below for breakdown). Debt Service Total (average) Interest Paid Fleet Facility $ 24,255,000 $ 1,850,000 $ 12,855,130 Grant Tower $ 7,070,000 $ 540,000 $ 3,748,835 Park Trail Project $ 5,055,000 $ 387,000 $ 2,681,653 Total $ 36,380,000 $ 2,777,000 $ 19,285,618 note:this does not factor the RDA's contribution to debt service payments,which would likely be$330,000 but for only 15 years,rather than the full 20 life year of the bond (the district expires then). B. Amount Available for other projects - The following chart breaks down the amount of money available for other, non-debt projects, under the Mayor's proposed budget. If the Council were to bond for all three proposed projects, next fiscal year there would be $3.8 million available for "other projects" compared to the $5.14 available this year (a $1.34 million difference - assuming CIP was funded at the same $21.5 million level). 4 $25,000,000 -- a Other Projects Other Debt(scheduled) $15,000,000 ❑Daylighting City Creek/Park Trail Bond(proposed) ■Grant Tower Bond(proposed) $10,000,000 ®Fleet Facility Bond (proposed) ■General Obligation Bond Debt $5,000,000 $0 , FY 2007 FY 2008 C C. 10 Year Plan- All of these projects are contemplated in the 10 Year Plan. Daylighting City Creek is the only one that is not contemplated to be paid for with debt service. The plan slates this project for FY 2010 ($1 million from general fund, and $4 million from"other sources"). 1. The proposed bond would shift yearly money away from parks, streets, and transportation projects toward the "debt service" category. However, the 10 Year Plan does contemplate some shift in this manner for bonding for the Fleet Facility and Grant-tower related projects - in the amount of $29.6 million (a $6.8 million difference). 2. The Park Trail project (Daylighting City Creek), is planned for in the 10 Year Plan, but with a funding source of $1 million from the general fund, and $4 million from"other sources," not necessarily identified as bonding. This could potentially offset the 10 year 7.95% funding"balance." D. Cost reduction options for City Creek 900 South/Folsom Ave Park Projects - The Administration has given council staff the following breakdown of project components for both 900 South and Folsom Avenue (see attachment 1). At a ` '` minimum, in order for this land trade with Union Pacific to be "bondable," the land 5 needs to be improved for public use (i.e. soil erosion seeding). This is estimated to cost $200,000 for 900 South and $100,000 for the Folsom Trailway. The Council could elect to fund any of the project components for 900 South and Folsom in any combination (though they are grouped into the Administration's recommended Phase I and Phase II for each). Currently the bond proposal would pay for Phases I and II for the Folsom corridor, and only the basic landscaping for the 900 South corridor (listed as "Basic Native Erosion Control Seeding" on the breakdown). Council Staff has prepared the following chart showing options of funding various phases for the Folsom and 900 South Corridors: City Creek Park Options Debt Service Payment Debt Service savings from proposed Payments(Council budget(Council Staff Cost Staff Estimate) Estimate) Option 1-Proposed 900 South-Basic Landscaping Only $ 200,000 Folsom Corridor-Full Development (Phases I&II) $ 5,012,500 Total $ 5,212,500 $ 387,000 $ - Option 2 900 South-Basic Landscaping Only $ 200,000 Folsom Corridor-Basic Landscaping Only (no stream development) $ 100,000 Total $ 300,000 $ 23,000 $ 364,000 Option 3 900 South-Basic Landscaping Only $ 200,000 Folsom Corridor-Phase I Only $ 2,512,500 Total $ 2,712,500 $ 208,000 $ 179,000 Option 4 900 South-Phase 1 Only $ 1,887,500 Folsom Corridor-Phase 1 Only $ 2,512,500 Total $ 4,400,000 $ 337,000 $ 50,000 Option 2 would present the greatest savings in terms of bonding costs, and includes the minimum landscaping required for the bond. However, this option does not include stream or trail development. Option 3 includes the very minimum landscaping for 900 South, and includes stream opening and trailway development for Folsom Corridor (though not the full, Phase II park development). Option 4 includes trailway development for both. It is important to note that security lighting costs are included in Phase II of both projects ($1 million for 900 South, $500,000 for Folsom), not Phase I. E. Cost reduction options for the Fleet Facility - there are a variety of cost "offsets" that could be used in order to reduce the total amount needed to be bonded for to pay for the new Fleet Facility. If the Council is interested they may wish to ask the Administration to investigate these options further. 6 1. The total amount includes $3.215 million to pay back the surplus land account. The Council could choose not to pay this amount back, thereby reducing the total bond. 2. The estimated value of the current Fleet Facility site is between $3 and $5 million, and would cost approximately $1.8 million to demolish and environmentally mitigate the site. In the best case, the net revenue from selling the site would be $3.2 million, which could also offset the total amount needed to be bonded for. ■ A complication with this strategy would be the timing. This money would not be available until the following fiscal year. A possibility could be that the Council could "balloon payment options" into the debt service schedule for that year - thereby reducing the debt service payments for the years remaining on the bond - or the Council could use the proceeds from the sale of the land to make the debt service payment for that particular year, instead of using the general fund for that particular year. 3. Currently fleet vehicles and the Police motorcycles are stored at a warehouse at the international center. The Administration has indicated that there is sufficient room at the new Fleet Facility to house these vehicles. If that is the case, the warehouse at the international center could be sold. Property management has estimated the value at $3 million. The Council would run into a similar problem with timing described in item #2 above, but could handle the situation in the same fashion. ➢ The current cost estimate for the Fleet Facility is $24.7 million. If all of the above cost reduction items are undertaken, the net "cost" could be reduced by almost $10 million, to $15.3 million. This would leave yearly bond payments at around $1.1 million (with around $300,000 of that amount to be paid for by the Refuse and Fleet funds). The following information was provided previously for the Council Work Session on May 18, 2006. It is provided again for your reference. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM BUDGET RECOMMENDATION The Mayor presented his budget for Fiscal Year 2006-2007 on Tuesday, May 2. The following staff report details the proposed Capital Improvement Budget. The Administration recommends funding CIP from the general fund in the amount of ,,, $21,452,138, a $1.9 million increase over last year's CIP funding allocation (9% increase). Of this, approximately $8.9 million is general obligation bond debt (dedicated property 7 taxes). Therefore, a total of $12,502,682, or 7.11% of general fund revenue, is proposed for Capital projects. Of this amount, $7,306,425 million is allocated for debt service projects (including the new debt service proposal for the Fleet Facility and other projects, discussed later), leaving a remaining balance of$5,136,257 for other projects. The recently-adopted CIP 10 Year Plan indicates that in order for the capital projects to be fully funded over the 10 year cycle of the plan, an average of 7.95% of general fund revenues should be dedicated to capital projects. In order to reach the 7.95% number, the Council would have to increase CIP funding by $1,473,924 over the Mayor's recommended budget. The CIP 10 Year Plan acknowledges that 7.95% of general fund balance will not be sufficient to fund all projects in every year, but rather - over the 10 year period, if 7.95% is consistently dedicated every year, this will eventually cover all of the projects. In the past, the Council had a stated policy of dedicating a minimum of 9% of general fund revenues for Capital projects. In Fiscal Year 2007, the plan identifies $10.5 million in non-debt service projects, well over the current funding proposal of $5.14 million. The following are specific projects the administration has identified as "major projects" to fund in FY 2006-2007: o A General Obligation bond approved by the voters for The Leonardo and purchase of open space land (recognized property tax increase) (staff note: any additional funding to the Leonardo has not been incorporated into the CIP 10 Year Plan. This could affect the 10 year "balancing" of the plan at 7.95%), o The Mayor is also recommending a new sales tax bond issue: o A Sales Tax bond of$36,380,000: 4. Fleet Facility - construct a new fleet facility on land previously purchased and for which the bond will reimburse the cost of the land. 5. Grant Tower - complete the Grant Tower project (The RDA will contribute payments to the City for their share of the debt service). 6. Daylighting City Creek @ Folsom Street Corridor and 900 South Rail line right-of- way improvements - development/daylighting of the Folsom Street/City Creek Parkway, landscaping along the 900 South track line when it is abandoned by UTA ➢ All of these projects are contemplated in the 10 Year Plan. Daylighting City Creek is the only one that is not contemplated to be paid for with debt service. The plan slates this project for FY 2010 ($1 million from general fund, and $4 million from "other sources"). The total FY 2007 debt service payment would be approximately $1 million, of which the RDA would pay $330,000 (their share of the Grant Tower funding). However, this does not represent the total annual debt service payment as it would technically be a "partial year" by the time the bond was issued. The debt service payment for the remainder of the 20 year loan is anticipated to be an average of$2.77 million per year. 8 Debt Service Total (average) Interest Paid Fleet Facility $ 24,255,000 $ 1,850,000 $ 12,855,130 grant Tower $ 7,070,000 $ 540,000 $ 3,748,835 Park Trail Project $ 5,055,000 $ 387,000 $ 2,681,653 Total $ 36,380,000 $ 2,777,000 $ 19,285,618 note: this does not factor the RDA's contribution to debt service payments,which would likely be$330,000 but for only 15 years, rather than the full 20 life year of the bond (the district expires then). ➢ The proposed bond would shift yearly money away from parks, streets, and transportation projects toward the "debt service" category. However, the 10 Year Plan does contemplate some shift in this manner for bonding for the Fleet Facility and Grant-tower related projects - in the amount of $29.6 million (a $6.8 million difference). ➢ The Park Trail project (Daylighting City Creek), is planned for in the 10 Year Plan, but with a funding source of $1 million from the general fund, and $4 million from "other sources," not necessarily identified as bonding. This could potentially offset the 10 year 7.95% funding"balance." ➢ The following chart breaks down the amount of money available for other, non-debt projects, under the Mayor's proposed budget. If the Council were to bond for all three proposed projects, next fiscal year there would be $3.8 million available for "other projects" compared to the $5.14 available this year (a $1.34 million difference- assuming CIP was funded at the same$21.5 million level). 9 $25,000,000 I I' I"1i $20,000,000 ,1 i —— 1 I l 1 j. 0 Other Projects I 1 ` el Other Debt(scheduled) 1$ 5,000,000 ❑Daylighting City Creek/Park Trail Bond (proposed) ■Grant Tower Bond (proposed) $10,000,000 0 ®Fleet Facility Bond (proposed) ■General Obligation Bond Debt $5,000,000 $0 FY 2007 FY 2008 o The Mayor is recommending $500,000 towards Liberty Park renovations (Concessions and Children s Garden Landscaping), and $400,000 for Stage 2 of Pioneer Park Renovations (Stage II total cost is estimated at $1.85 million. The Administration indicates they would seek outside funding sources for the balance. They have applied for a $900,000 federal grant, but have not indicated other funding sources that would be likely). Further details regarding these park improvements will be provided in the Council's briefing session. o In addition to the 7.11% of general fund revenue slated for CIP projects, the Mayor is proposing using a total of $3.5 million from fund balance for Land Acquisition and to help expand the Leonardo facility at Library Square. This use of fund balance for this project is not contemplated in the CIP 10 Year Plan. The Council may wish to weigh this project with the various other uses for one-time money (police vehicles, equipment expenses, Grant Tower, etc). Twenty-two (22) non debt-related projects have been recommended for funding from general fund CIP by the Administration, for a total of $5,136,257. The following chart shows a breakdown of funding totals, by type of project, and compares the various recommendations to what is called for in the 10 Year Plan: 10 Non-Debt Service CIP Projects Amount CIP Board Mayor's Requested Recommendation Recommendation CIP 10 Year Plan Streets $4,379,284 $3,035,000 $2,715,000 $3,644,750 Transportation $1,853,750 $985,000 $985,000 $2,205,000 Parks $5,792,285 $1,100,557 $1,436,257 $3,708,285 Public Facilities $0 $0 $0 $930,000 Total $12,025,319 $5,120,557 $5,136,257 $10,488,035 Attached is a complete log of all CIP project applications for the Council's discussion on Thursday May 5th. KEY ELEMENTS The following are key points in relation to the FY 2007 CIP Applications and funding rankings: A. Of the 38 CIP funding applications, 4 projects are not specifically listed in the CIP 10 year plan. • #9 Pioneer Park could fall into the "to be determined" line item in the more general Parks category "Park Facilities Reconstruction" in the 10 Year Plan. However, this is not a specifically listed project. • Three of these four project requests were submitted by constituents (#15 750 North 2200 West Street Improvements, #19 800 South 1100 East Barrier Beautification, and #38 Yale/Herbert Safety Project), for a total of $213,750. The CIP 10 Year Plan incorporates $250,000 each year for to-be-determined "Community Projects." B. Though the 10 Year Plan calls for various Public Facilities improvements in Fiscal Year 2007, there were no applications made for Public Facilities improvements in the FY 2007 CIP. The Council may wish to clarify with the Administration if there are plans to handle these following improvements elsewhere in the general fund. The following is a list of projects that are included in FY 2007 in the 10 Year Plan, but did not receive funding requests for this upcoming fiscal year: • $350,000 - Plaza 349 - replace/install fire suppression system (Public Facilities) • $330,000 - City & County Building - replace carpet throughout building (Public Facilities) (staff note: this is one year of a two-year funding plan) • $250,000 - City & County Building - exterior stone strengthener/upkeep (Public Facilities) • $250,000 - Acquisition of Open Space for future development(Parks) 11 • C. The following are projects that are scheduled in the 10 Year Plan that were requested but not funded (the total amount unfunded for projects otherwise planned for FY 2007 in the 10 Year Plan is approximately $2.6 million): • $580,000 - #22- Rotary Glen Park Improvements (Parks) • $60,000 - #23 -4th, 8th, 9th Avenue Stairway Analysis (Parks) • $315,000 - #24 - Jordan River Trail Safety Lighting, State Ag Building to Redwood Road (Parks) (Staff note: The CIP 10 Year Plan anticipates that this would be a project funded in FY 2012, and would be partially offset by CDBG funds) • $50,000 - #25 - Residential concrete street rehab, 1700 to 1900 East, 900 & 1300 South (Streets) • $200,000- #26 - Sprinkler Irrigation Central System Interface (Parks) • $100,000 - #27 - Memory Grove Trails Improvements, East Side to A Street & 9th Ave (Parks) • $50,000 - #28 -Jordan Park Power Pedestals, 900 West 1000 South (Parks) • $50,000- #29 -Traffic Camera Installation, 5 traffic signals (Transportation) • $400,000 - #30 - Lindsey Garden Park Tennis Court (Parks) (Staff note: The CIP 10 Year Plan does not anticipate funding this project until FY 2009) • $568,000- #31 - East Capitol Street Reconstruction (Streets) • $275,000 - #32 - Arterial Lighting, Redwood Road - North Temple to 2100 South (Transportation) • $260,000 - #33 - Arterial Lighting, 700 East, S. Temple to 700 South (Transportation) • $65,000 - #34 - Arterial Lighting, California Ave - 900 West to Redwood Rd (Transportation) • $50,000 - #35 - McClelland Trail Corridor Master Plan - Jordan River Canal at 900 South to 2700 South (Parks) (Staff Note: These are matching funds to be met by Public Utilities) • $600,000 - #36 - Fairmont Park Tennis Courts (Parks) (Staff note: The CIP 10 Year Plan does not anticipate funding this project until FY 2012) D. The Mayor's recommended budget includes $400,000 in funding for Pioneer Park in order to complete renovations beyond Phase I, which the Council has already funded. The Administration has previously indicated to the Council that they are seeking $900,000 in federal funds. The addition of these amounts would not be sufficient to cover the total project costs of Phase II of the Pioneer Park renovations. Renovations to the park that would emphasize the historic origins (Heritage Gardens, Historic Walkway, Bell Tower) are not scheduled until Phase III. Aside from the $400,000 in requested funds, there are $3.2 million in proposed renovations that remain to be funded. All three phases are part of "Stage 1," the stage that has been vetted by the community stakeholders. Stages 2 and 3, the water wall and skating rink, are not considered an official part of the community-approved Pioneer Park Master Plan. The following is a breakdown of these last two phases, and the 12 specific components of each phase, (the attached design document shows these proposed changes in greater detail): a. Stage 1, Phase II-$1.85 million total cost • Great Lawn • Concession Area/Stage/Reconfigured Restrooms • Tables and Chairs • Circulation path around great lawn b. Stage 1, Phase III -$1.75 million total cost • Themed Playground (possibly historic themed) • Historic Bell Tower • Heritage Gardens • Historic Walkway • Volleyball Courts E. The Mayor's recommended budget includes $500,000 to construct concessions and a children s garden in Liberty Park. The followings lists the remaining projects "left" in Liberty Park renovations, according to the CIP 10 Year Plan ($3.25 million, including FY 2007): • $750,000-Children's Playground Renovation(FY 2009) • $1,000,000 - Greenhouse reconstruction & Jordan Greenhouse demolition '' (FY 2011) (staff note: this will consolidate greenhouse operations at Liberty Park). • $1,000,000 - Maintenance Building&Yard Reconstruction (FY 2012) F. Attached, please find the Mayor's recommendations for CIP funding, the list of projects scheduled in FY 2007 in the CIP 10 Year Plan, as well as the master plan for Pioneer Park, including cost breakdown. Staff will have the CIP 10 Year Plan for reference at the briefing, and it is available upon request. POTENTIAL MATTERS AT ISSUE A. The Council may wish to revisit the City and County building re-carpeting project. It is listed in the 10 Year Plan for FY 2007, but was not a funding request this year. However, due to the possible reconfiguration of space for the proposed one-stop counter, it could make financial sense to do at least one quadrant of carpet for the building in the same year as this proposal, so as not to duplicate efforts. The estimated cost for one quadrant of the City and County building is $116,925. B. The Council may wish to clarify with the Administration, the status of the escalating costs of construction materials, and the increased difficulty in obtaining construction bids. C. The Council may wish to clarify with the Administration what the specific debt service payments would be for the proposed sales tax bond issue, component project 41160, by project. The Council may also wish to clarify with the Administration what exactly will be constructed along the Folsom Ave and 900 South Rail lines. 13 D. The Council may wish to clarify with the Administration what components of Phase II will be funded with the $400,000 request, and what, if any, outside sources will be sought to pay for the remaining $3.2 million in proposed renovations. E. The Council may wish to resume their discussion of whether to pay for the remaining Grant. Tower costs with one-time fund balance, or through bonding (note: The Council may wish to consider that some bonding through the City would have to be arranged so that the RDA can pay their portion of the costs through more favorable interest rates). CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM BUDGET PROCESS The Capital Improvement Program is a multiyear planning program that uses two main planning documents: a 10 Year Capital Improvement Plan, and each fiscal year's capital budget. The Council recently adopted a revised 10 Year Capital Improvement Plan, on January 17, 2006, after a lengthy process to identify the most critical and realistic projects that need to be funded over the next decade. It should be noted that the overall amount to of transfer from general fund in order to pay for this 10 Year Plan over the decade, is 7.95%. Note: 7.95% is the number to be allocated to balance over the 10 year period. If 7.95% of general fund revenue is allocated, there will be some years that will have a surplus and some years that have a deficit. Following the Mayor's presentation of his recommended budget on Tuesday May 4th, the Council received a schedule of the proposed capital projects for fiscal year 2006-07 with ranking information from the CIP Board, Administrative Staff and the Mayor. The schedule identifies all of the projects that were submitted for funding with the Mayor's recommendations and the priority rankings of the Citizens Advisory Board and Administrative staff. The City Council makes the final determination of projects to be funded. Council staff will project the schedule on the screen during the work session to facilitate discussion and funding decisions. The Administration accepts applications for capital projects from citizens and City departments each year for consideration for recommendation by the Mayor to the Council for funding. All applications are reviewed by the CIP Citizens Board and a team of City staffers from each department who specialize in capital projects. Copies of each project application can be made if Council Members desire. During the past two years, the Council has appropriated funds for debt service and time sensitive projects during the annual budget process and waited until later in the summer to make other appropriations. The Council may wish to determine whether it wants to pursue this same coarse of action or whether the Council wishes to appropriate the entire amount of CIP funding during the annual budget process. COUNCIL POLICIES REGARDING CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM 14 On April 6, 1999 the City Council adopted a resolution entitled "Council Policies Regarding Salt Lake City's General Fund Capital Improvement Program." This resolution specifically stated the Council's intentions that the Administration regard the resolution as the Council's policy objectives for the City's General Fund CIP Program. In December 1999 the Council adopted a resolution entitled "Salt Lake City Council Capital and Debt Management Policies" which set forth the capital and debt-management policies that were intended to guide the City in addressing the deferred and long-term infrastructure needs of the City. In December 1999, the Council also adopted an ordinance (which was amended in May 2000, and again in 2006 - see section on impact fees below) establishing impact fees on new development within the City. Revenue from these fees are dedicated to fund those capital projects which are directly attributable to growth. Some of the Council's capital improvement program policies are highlighted as follows: • Establish a formal multi-year capital program • Link the 10-year needs list and the annual capital budget • Identify the extent and cost of deferred maintenance • Utilize condition information to select and prioritize capital projects • Focus attention on the long-term implications of capital decisions • Identify full life cycle project costs • Prepare multi-year revenue and expenditure forecasts • Give priority to capital improvement projects that reduce current City maintenance requirements. • Continue taking advantage of one-time opportunities to supplement base budget CIP (i.e. one-time revenues, particularly from the sale of real property). • Maintain a capital improvement prioritization process that allows citizen and community input. • Provide ongoing funding to address capital improvement needs of the City. (Council's policy is that at least 9% of on-going General Fund revenue be allocated to the CIP Fund. Class C, federal funds, impact fees, and one-time monies are all in addition to the 9%. For fiscal year 2004-05, the Mayor proposed a one-time reduction to approximately 7%.) ➢ It should be noted however, that in October 2005, the Council made the decision to revise the 20 Year Inventory of Capital Needs and evaluate spending expectations as compared with recent budget realities. In January 2006, the Council adopted a fiscally constrained 10 Year Capital Facilities Plan, in which each department was asked to identify the most crucial and realistic projects, in order to arrive at a plan that was more likely to be executed to completion. ➢ The consultants hired to form the plan noted that in order to fully pay for the fiscally constrained 10 Year list of projects, the Council would need an average of 7.95% of the general fund per year allocation to CIP (see note on page 2). 15 "SPECIAL" ITEMS WITHIN THE CIP BUDGET Impact Fees Impact fees are a financing tool that enables the City to address some of the infrastructure necessitated by new growth without further deferring current infrastructure needs. Impact fees cannot be assessed to address issues of deferred capital infrastructure. Revenue collected from impact fees must be expended or encumbered within six years after receipt, unless the Council identifies, in writing, an extraordinary and compelling reason to hold the impact fees longer. Under such circumstances, the Council must establish an absolute date by which the impact fees will be expended. The Council may wish to ask the Administration whether some of the CIP applications qualify for partial funding from impact fees. An independent consultant conducted an analysis of impact fees in Salt Lake City and made recommendations regarding updating the City's impact fees to reflect the now- current, fiscally constrained 10 Year Capital Facilities Plan. The Council adopted this revised schedule of fees to reflect the current list of projects. Additionally, the ordinance was amended (at the recommendation of the consultants) to include a yearly inflationary adjustment to cover steadily-increasing construction costs (the standard identified is the Engineering News Record yearly construction cost index). 16 MEMORANDUM TO: Dave Buhler, Chair Salt Lake City Council Cindy Gust-Jensen FROM: Dell Cook V?' Engineering Division DATE: September 15, 2006 RE: Liberty Park CIP Project-2006/2007 Children's Garden Improvement and Other Enhancements As a follow up to Tuesday night CIP discussion attached is the following: 1. Estimated cost to improve the Children's Garden area and associated concession area connections. This project includes demolition of the old restroom, upgrade ball crawl cage to a picnic pavilion,making improvements to the children's play area(bouldering walls, new surfacing, group areas,picnic areas, furnishings and new drainage system). The estimated cost of this project is $653,000. The proposed CIP has a current placeholder of$500,000. 2. Estimated cost to make other associated park improvements outside the Children's Garden area that would improve and enhance the concession area in relationship to the lake. This project includes reconfiguration of the lake edge and boat dock, create a public amphitheatre (in lieu of bandstand),relocate the war monument and provide a new surface to the concession ride area. The estimated cost for this project is $590,000. 3. Estimated cost to expand the lake retention and create a sidewalk promenade around the lake. This project requires that approval and support of the Public Utilities Department. This project includes a new edge for the lake, sidewalk around the entire lake perimeter and the placement of 39 benches. The estimated cost for this project is $494,000. Items#2 and#3 are considerations for future years. 4. A copy of the document submitted to the Landmarks Commission for approval. All elements of the proposal were approved except the gazebo kiosk located next to the amphitheatre. This document shows concept drawings and plans for each of the above mentioned projects. I hope this information helps you understand the next phase of improvements for Liberty Park. Liberty Park Children's Garden - Cost Estimate 15-Sep-06 Item Quantify Unit Cost Total Mitit tI ril 8 li O v}=` sue. S. s.x€ d° �, £ ^'1 a; sY.':�e`��„ :.�1.1:;"..'�.` Mobilization I LS $50,000.00 S.50.000.00 Total Mobilization $50,000.00 Remove Horizontal Elements(Vertical Poles Remain) 1 EA $10,000.00 $10,000.00- Demolition of Restroom 1 EA $30,000.00 530.000.00 Demolition of Fence 1 EA $1,000.00 $i,000,70 Total Demolition 541,000.00 Landscape ;, T y. a" 4? t, tiv' q ors{i " Trees-2"Caliper 34 EA $350.00 S11,900.00 Grass Seed,Top Soil and Imgation 7,000 SF $1.25 $8,750 00 12"Wood chips for Tot Lots 17,200 SF $1.50 $25,800.00 Dry Stream Bed Cobble/Stone 1.100 SF $3.00 S3,300.00 5'Tall Dry Stack Rock Wall(2'-3'Boulders) 1,500 LF $50.00 '7 5.000.00 Sandstone Stepping Stones 2,200 SF $20.00 $44,000.00 Fence 380 LF $30.00 $11,400.00 8'-25'Timbers 50 EA $400.00 S20,000.00 Total Landsca•e $200,150.00 h 1,41 Concrete Pathway 5,000 SF $5.00 $25,000.00 Total Hardscape $25,000.00 Pavilion Renovation 1 EA $100,000.00 $100,000.00 Picnic Table 12 EA $1,250.00 $15.000.00 18"x18"x18"Sandstone Block Benches 35 EA $500.00 S17,500.00 Trash Receptacle 4 EA $500.00 $2,000.00 Total Amenities $134,500.00 Storm Drain Line 700 LF $60.00 $42,000.00 Storm Drain Pump 1 EA $10,000.00 $10,000.00 Total Utilites $52,000.00 Sub Total $502,650.00 10%Contingency $50,265.00 Grand Total Construction Cost $552,915.00 8%of Design Fee $44,233.20 10%Administrative Fees $55,291.50 Overall Project Total $652,439.70 Pond Excavation 378 CY $20.00 $7,555.56 20'x60'Boat Dock 1 EA $30,000.00 530.000.00 Concrete Pathway 890 SF $5.00 $4,450.00 Total $42,005.56 B`.c. ..,M l3'r<:�� .t�».m�: '� M'AgglignlEieaMitiltetaitta. Soil Fill 3.000 CY $15.00 $45,000.00 Concrete-8"x48"Retaining Wall 117 CY $550.00 564.533.33 Concrete Pathway 1,500 SF $5.00 S7,500.00 Concrete Pavers 750 SF $10.00 $7,600.00 Concrete Stairs 22 CY $550.00 $12.011152 Grass Seed,Top Soil and Irrigation 31.000 SF $1.25 $38,750.00 Trees-2"Caliper 36 EA $350.00 $12,600.00 Total $187,901.85 ..nRRaaA' . ✓ ?w: ..Itu a�� 111 1 l„ V ..:..e.x _-.. a lnin, i... Asphalt/Concrete Demolition 10.430 SF $2.00 $38,860.00 Concrete Pathway 19,430 SF $5.00 $97,150.00 Trees-2"Caliper 18 EA $350.00 $6.300.00 Tree lrigation • 15 EA $50.00 $000.00 Tree Grates-4' 18 EA $1,500.00 $27,000.00 Total $170,210.00 Relocate War ifi air al M Concrete Demolition 5.000 SF $2.00 $10,000.00 Concrete Pathway 4,000 SF $5.00 $20,000.00 Concrete Pavers 1,300 SF $10.00 $13,000.00 Concrete-8"x60"Retaining Wall 6 CY $550.00 $3.025.00 Relocate Flagpole 1 EA $1,500.00 $1,50000 Grass Seed,Top Soil and Irrigation 4,600 SF $1.25 S5,7 0.00 Total $53,275.00 Sub Total $453,392.41 10%Contingency $45,339.24 Grand Total Construction Cost $498,731.65 8%of Design Fee $39,898.53 10%Administrative Fees $49,873.16 C'1SP3.3 f- Liberty Lake Retention Expansion And Sidewalk Promenade Cost Est. DemoRemoval of old curb 2310 Ln. Ft. @ $9.00 20,790.00 New Conc. curb wall 2310 Ln. Ft. @ $30.00 69,300.00 Conc. walk 11,550 Sq. Ft. @ $6.00 69,300.00 Modular Conc. wall 2241 Ln. Ft. @ $50.00 112,050.00 Bench area conc. 1119 Sq. Ft. @ $6.00 6,714.00 Conc. entry walks 930 Sq. Ft. @ $6.00 5,580.00 Modular wall @ entry walks 82 Ln. Ft. @ $50.00 4,100.00 Grading/Excavation Lump Sum 35,000.00 Landscape Sod/Trees Lump Sum 15,000.00 Benches 39 @ $1,500.00 58,500.00 Waste Containers 12 @ $350.00 4,200.00 Sub Total $400,534.00 Contingency $40,500.00 Design/Administration $53,000.00 TOTAL $494,034.00 Existing surface area of lake is 262,289 sq. ft. Approximate depth is 2' creating 524,578 cu. ft., (12 ac. ft.) storage. Expanded area creates an additional 21,382 sq. ft. Additional area @ 2' deep creates 42,764 cu. ft. (.98 ac. ft.) storage, plus 4' deep over exist. area for total storage of 1,091,920 cu. ft. (25.06 ac. ft.) Liberty Park Children's Garden - Cost Estimate 15-Sep-06 Item Quantity Unit Cost Total ` n fig,. �a ,. ,I RSA r, SSI Mobilization I LS $50,000.00 550.000.00 Total Mobilizationil $50,000.00 ,C QF►C!?1F�fliQ11 7, aF,F.Li , 1,11 � � .,;:..�r<-[t .AI Remove Horizontal Elements(Vertical Poles Remain) �' EA $10,000.00 $10,000.00 Demolition of Restroom 1 EA $30,000.00 530.000.00 Demolition of Fence i EA $1,00,200 Si,000 00 Total Demolition $41,000.00 Trees-2"Caliper 34 EA $350.00 $11,900.00 Grass Seed,Top Soil and Irrigation 7,000 SF $1.25 58,750 00 12"Wood chips for Tot Lots 17,200 SF $1.50 $25:800.00 Dry Stream Bed Cobble/Stone 1,100 SF $3.00 53.300.00 5'Tall Dry Stack Rock Wall(2'-3'Boulders) 1.500 LF $50.00 675.000.00 Sandstone Stepping Stones 2,200 SF $20.00 $44,000.00 Fence 380 LF $30.00 $11,460.011 8'-25'Timbers 50 EA $400.00 $20.000.00 Total Landscape $200,150.00 Concrete Pathway 5,000 SF $5.00 $25,000 00 Total Hardscae $25 006.00 Pavilion Renovation 1 EA $100,000.00 $100,000.00 Picnic Table 12 EA $1,250.00 $15000.00 18"x18"x18"Sandstone Block Benches 35 FA $500.00 617.500.00 Trash Receptacle 4 EA $500.00 52,000.00 Total Amenitiesg $134,500.00 worm owlsam Stone Drain Line 700 LF $60.00 $42,000 00 Storm Drain Pump 1 EA $10,000 00 $10,00.2 00 Total Utilites $52,000.00 Sub Total $502,650.00 10%Contingency $50,265.00 Grand Total Construction Cost $552,915.00 8%of Design Fee $44,233.20 10%Administrative Fees $55,291.50 Overall Project Total $652,439.70 iggiitOA*NgrgMarhWirfili. a r£ k .�. rEIF7 1. �, t Pond Excavation 378 CY $20.00 555.56 20'x60'Boat Dock 1 EA $30,000.00 530,000.00 Concrete Pathway 890 SF $5.00 $4.450.00 Total $42 005 56 �� '� W�:.�sxr� ^r vW s,` w f3N4,ft` Soil Fill 3.000 CY $15.00 545,000 00 Concrete-8"x48"Retaining Wall 117 CY $550.00 S64.533.33 Concrete Pathway 1,500 SF $5.00 57,500.00 Concrete Pavers 750 SF $10.00 57,500.00 Concrete Stairs 22 CY $550.00 512.018.52 Grass Seed,Top Soil and Irrigation 31,000 SF $1.25 538.750 9)1 Trees-2"Caliper 36 EA $350.00 $12,600.00 Total $167,901.85 G044!p..€t040tra FW-411��.1 ..... : :.mom ,.: Asphalt/Concrete Demolition 19,430 SF $2.00 €38,860.00 Concrete Pathway 19,430 SF $5.00 $97,150.00 Trees-2"Caliper 18 FA $350.00 S0.300.00 Tree Irrigation 18 FA $50.00 $900.00 Tree Grates-4' 18 FA $1,500.00 527,000 00 Total $170,210.00 F:00:cat a YV:01 o�al v ma a'`o�EL%9.,... g�'aI�. _ l ���F� : �^tea;SFIE, Concrete Demolition 5.000 SF $2.00 610.00O00 Concrete Pathway 4,000 SF $5.00 $20,000.00 Concrete Pavers 1,300 SF $10.00 $13,000.00 Concrete-8"x60"Retaining Wall 6 CY $550.00 S3.025.00 Relocate Flagpole I FA $1,500.00 $1,500 00 Grass Seed,Top Soil and Irrigation 4,600 SF $1.25 55,750.00 Total $53,275.00 Sub Total $453,392.41 10%Contingency $45,339.24 Grand Total Construction Cost $498,731.65 8%of Design Fee $39,898.53 10%Administrative Fees $49,873.16 53881_03.3 4 Liberty Lake Retention Expansion And Sidewalk Promenade Cost Est. DemoRemoval of old curb 2310 Ln. Ft. @ $9.00 20,790.00 New Conc. curb wall 2310 Ln. Ft. @ $30.00 69,300.00 Conc. walk 11,550 Sq. Ft. @ $6.00 69,300.00 Modular Conc. wall 2241 Ln. Ft. @ $50.00 112,050.00 Bench area conc. 1119 Sq. Ft. @ $6.00 6,714.00 Conc. entry walks 930 Sq. Ft. @ $6.00 5,580.00 Modular wall @ entry walks 82 Ln. Ft. @ $50.00 4,100.00 Grading/Excavation Lump Sum 35,000.00 Landscape Sod/Trees Lump Sum 15,000.00 Benches 39 @ $1,500.00 58,500.00 Waste Containers 12 @ $350.00 4,200.00 Sub Total $400,534.00 Contingency $40,500.00 Design/Administration $53,000.00 TOTAL S494,034.00 Existing surface area of lake is 262,289 sq. ft. Approximate depth is 2' creating 524,578 cu. ft., (12 ac. ft.) storage. Expanded area creates an additional 21,382 sq. ft. Additional area @ 2' deep creates 42,764 cu. ft. (.98 ac. ft.) storage, plus 4' deep over exist. area for total storage of 1,091,920 cu. ft. (25.06 ac. ft.) , . A • ii-•';''k''.. .•,,,, . ;•-•4• •',',„Z-.J.-ht , ir 4`ir..;11' -•1'.....-it, ,4,--,1* • • - - - , :Aect, , '' ..•-, ' '' ' .. . .. ....- a- •:441,0??,:i I / I E 1 ' K . . 11 1484,All', k{PI lir'', ,_.iralisiiiii,,, ESTABLISHED IN 188 il , ,, ,.i Y i .i . _ -----.. ---_, .----------_- ..--i-k.,-.,, Liberty Park i Concessions Area and , Adventure Garden - ,k. $fr• :4 ' i ,, ...*:4, :11Yr. , ' .,.11 •4 i4 IVA rig.-e• • ,, .„4,4- ,Air•Z+ I.: t1 • t • 4.-.:417'' , -tr."' - : . , • ,. ' 1 p '' ':'=7:1; ' .,- - ,-, ' • A'' •.I.... . . .•...ro. — ._ , ' • Landmarks Commission Review - ; • t - __ May 2006 . , '4 it A..4... 4!.. . . .. , Prepared by: MG B+A attn: Sharen Hauri 145 W. 200 S. Salt Lake City, Utah 84101 801.364.9696 • Table of Contents 1. PROJECT SUMMARY 3 2. SITE CONDITIONS A. Historic conditions 4 B. Existing conditions 4 C. Landmark status 5 3. PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS A. Concessions Area 5 B. Pedestrian Path and Allee 9 C. Amphitheatre 10 D. Adventure Garden 11 E. Construction and Materials 14 4. MASTER PLAN A. Map 1 — Existing Conditions 15 B. Map 2 — Master Plan 16 Liberty Park Improvements—Concessions and Children's Garden Page 2 Landmarks Commission Review April 20,2006 MG B+A • Liberty Park Concessions and Children's Garden I. PROJECT SUMMARY Salt Lake City Corporation, with the assistance of consultant MGB+A landscape architects, is proposing to construct several new amenities around the concessions area at Liberty Park. As part of the campaign to revitalize Liberty Park, a new concessions building was constructed here in 2006. This building sits in the location of the previous concessions area(as shown on the Map 7 —Existing Conditions foldout). However, the site around the concessions building has not received any attention or improvements. This project is a proposal to make changes to this part of the park to make it more welcoming and to add several new amenities. Proposed improvements (as shown on the Map 2—Master Plan foldout) include: 1. Improvements to the plaza area around the concessions building. 2. Extending and realigning the east-west pedestrian path and tree allee. 3. Reshaping the northwest edge of Liberty Lake. 4. Restoring the natural drainage channel west of Liberty Lake to the bridge. 5. Rebuilding the World Wars memorial slightly to the south. 6. Constructing a new amphitheatre into the hillside north of the lake. 7. Transforming the Children's Garden into a picnicking and gathering area with a pavilion, new landscaping and seating areas. • 110 . . .„„er, 7 D` SY^ t c°...ai Figure 1—Location of proposed improvements ra w #01011„ „*Ar* C P ;fir -r re ,..* r { ,r F s _, '14 0+ Concessions • --- Children's Garden te. 2. 'R NORTH :y1 tY• s `v" Liberty Park Improvements—Concessions and Children's Garden Page 3 Landmarks Commission Review April 20,2006 MGB+A 2. SITE CONDITIONS A. Historic Conditions The area around Liberty Lake is one of the oldest, most memorable parts of Liberty Park. Traditionally this area welcomed large gatherings of people for fun, games and performances. The area is shaped primarily by the lake, the landforms that surround it, and the many trees and pathways here. The architecture and built elements have always played a minor role. There are several small elements that may be considered historical, including several concrete column planters and bollards, a concrete pedestrian bridge. The origin and date of construction of these elements is not known. In addition, there is a World Wars monument that has been reconstructed. All of these elements are in deteriorating condition, and each would be affected by the redesign of this area. The bridge would be repaired to its former condition and restored to use. The War memorial would be moved slightly and rebuilt. The column planters and bollards are proposed to be removed. B. Existing Conditions This area of the park has fallen into a bit of disrepair in recent years. The Children's Garden has been closed and fenced off for several years. The restroom facility next to it was also closed. Several pathways were cutoff and the area became a confusing mix of open and closed off activities. For many years, the concessions area next to Liberty Lake has been a center of activity. People could purchase food and drinks and rent boats from a small concessions building. The paved area around the concessions stand also hosted small rides, including a merry-go-round, swings, and small Ferris wheel. For some time, a"Children's Garden" also operated here, with an adventurous layout of lookout platforms, climbing elements, a ball room, and other activities. The "Existing Conditions" map(Map 1 foldout) shows these elements. The new concessions building is constructed in a rustic style, similar to the "parkitecture" of the national parks. It includes large timber beams, cobbled rock, and a grand scale in proportions. It has set the stage for other park elements and gives this area a casual feel. Figure 2: Concrete column planters and bollards. New concessions Figure 3:Concrete pedestrian bridge. building behind. Figure 4: World Wars memorial. Liberty Park Improvements—Concessions and Children's Garden Page 4 Landmarks Commission Review April 20,2006 MGB+A 0116. C. Landmark Status Liberty Park is an historic district on the National Register of Historic Places and on the Salt Lake City Landmarks listing. This submittal fulfills the requirement to request the Salt Lake City Historic Landmarks Commission approval on major construction projects on listed properties. 3. PROPOSED A. Concessions Area IMPROVEMENTS Building and Plaza The concessions area will be transformed with the new concessions building. The building is significantly larger than the previous structure and has interior seating and restrooms incorporated into the building. These changes have altered how vehicles and people move around the building and in and out of it. The plaza area around it needs to be improved to accommodate this new circulation, and also deserves to be improved to create a more pleasant place to sit outside, enjoy a meal, and view activity in the park. The existing amusement rides (merry-go-round, Ferris wheel, and swings) will be accommodated, but the hardscape surface around them will be upgraded from asphalt to a concrete and paver pattern. The long-term future of the rides is uncertain because they are not profitable. Existing (.(s i l,,,, Merry-Go-Round I',Ihw.,, 0 iz,t1: '1� ILnh VII, //7 i,l,,p, ,; - _ ----_ - /// l 1 Irl,r111,1:1011 \F L, l I i 4,nl,hnh;•ai ,�, /' • ,. Lo,,diun _Ritlu. Curie sign ti ' I ' '''''` (Aid i_ .,MI I',r.l I��� t't�is }k, ?rl iiiv Q '' r Pk,i4F, I Su,.,rn Figure 5-Improvements to the concessions area. 60 Liberty Park Improvements—Concessions and Children's Garden Page 5 Landmarks Commission Review April 20,2006 MGB+A Liberty Lake This plan also calls for recreating and improving the water features in this area. The northwest corner of Liberty Lake is proposed to be extended up to the edge of 600 East. This increases the capacity of this stormwater detention basin and creates a direct paved path to the boat dock. This eliminates the current grass paver path, which is often muddy and is not ADA accessible. It also replaces the concrete curb around the lake that is breaking and washing out. A new dock would be installed that will be wider and easier to maneuver. Ai, i .,.. , i.,, ) a ram: . r''..... • --, IOW ‘ " uniptiawcwimill iiimami _ I' „o_ Tom„-.7- � , ,,,,,,,,..„...,ti. r� Figure 6-New boat dock and extension to Liberty Lake shoreline. ~ iiiiitiv 11444,. Retention Wall to Protect Berms (Retaining Wall Varies in Height) Lkµ Flood Level New Sidewalk&shore Protection Cobble ` Normal Lake Level Figure 7-Section of a more durable Liberty Lake shoreline construction,showing normal lake level and flood stage. Liberty Park Improvements—Concessions and Children's Garden Page 6 Landmarks Commission Review April 20,2006 MGB+A Columns and Bollards The two existing concrete planters and five short concrete bollards are proposed to be removed. Because of the new building construction and path realignment, these elements no longer line up with the major pathways and create obstructions into proposed plaza areas. These elements are also deteriorating with water damage and spalling concrete. The planters atop the columns could be relocated if their condition permits. • -ti A' =mot • y , b �- 15 ler F: hl _ iSl ,i • Zar S -:.cam •G MA r - .If Figures 8, 9, 10— Concrete column planter and bollards. • Information Kiosk Another element to be added to this area is an information kiosk that was proposed as a part of the Signage and Wayfinding program, reviewed by the Landmarks Committee September 2004 and approved in November 2005. This kiosk would contain orientation maps for the park and . provide a place for park concessionaires and `. 4 -- city event organizers to post information on programs, events, and hours of operations. This kiosk would be designed to match the F . architecture, materials and scale of the concessions building. Figure 11-Example of kiosk in downtown Salt Lake City.A similar, but smaller scaled kiosk is proposed for Liberty Park's concessions area. • Liberty Park Improvements—Concessions and Children's Garden Page 7 Landmarks Commission Review April 20,2006 MGB+A HIM World Wars Memorial Another change in this area would be the minor relocation of the World Wars memorial. This element is proposed to be shifted approximately 100 feet to the south and rebuilt. In its current location, it is difficult for maintenance vehicles to maneuver around it, and it has been hit repeatedly, knocking off pieces of its corner. The walls also suffer from cracks, concrete spalling and water damage. The date and funding of this reconstructed monument are not known, but a plaque on the monument indicates that this version of the monument is a re-creation of a previous monument. The major features of this memorial are the plaques on each side of the monument. These will be preserved and incorporated into the new memorial, which will be of a similar material, shape and size. The new memorial is also proposed to incorporate seating, as either a seat wall integrated into the wall or benches along it. RI 7,gym' `"amp • ` 4 f ' 44419 Figures 12, 13, 14- World War memorial damage;the dedication plaque noting its original construction date(of a prior version)of 1929;and water damage. Figure 15- The existing monument consists of • a low wall with plaques on both sides and a t ' large flagpole. Plaques read "To Those Who • Served in the World Wars." Liberty Park Improvements-Concessions and Children's Garden Page 8 Landmarks Commission Review April 20,2006 MG B+A MIN • B. Pedestrian Path and Tree Allee The pedestrian path and allee of trees that leads from the parking lot eastward to the concession area is proposed to be extended. A concrete path will be constructed and trees will be planted in the same formal allee. This will make this,entry into the park clearer and make wayfinding easier. It also forms a natural boundary to this concession area. Figure 16-Extended path and 1 allee leading to the concessions area. I t . e. a Llit* /11044011111411e. ' ', • . 1 .............. _ ,— ti.L.„ 1 ' 1 7 et di Figure 17-Existing path and allee leading to the concessions CO area. ''-�t^i?� '• i iy .Ii 4,4H'`'It r,.1.` c 1. • J i:y as i :fir{ Figure 18-Existing path and a/lee leading to the concessions area. ' - 1‘ - ' ' :4 !k. :-i ... �.V 1 i + i�d i ,,. ( 111 L 4 .ri, vn-'.._- %.,4"----t;', m14 rv, GO Liberty Park Improvements—Concessions and Children's Garden Page 9 Landmarks Commission Review April 20,2006 MGB+A C. Amphitheatre An amphitheatre is also proposed in this activity hub and to provide a place in the park for performances, lectures, and another informal seating area. This amphitheatre would be built into the hillside by extending the berm that runs along the northern side of Liberty Lake. This amphitheatre will have a natural feel, with grassy seating levels, simple stone steps, and a small stage, surrounded by flowering trees to enclose it. Figure 19-Proposed amphitheatre design. rri \\). `♦ Amphitheater h io„__ f—Gazeboto.Match j4kre'v Cd tossloo$tihd' ,„4loom i,d-N, to(.anon4/1 . Figure 20- View of amphitheatre toward concessions building. t t- .. - • � .is d F Af- \\\ .y5 4311„ Figure 21-Area north of the grassy hillside that borders Liberty Lake where a new t amphitheatre is proposed. F'� 1 Liberty Park Improvements—Concessions and Children's Garden Page 10 Landmarks Commission Review April 20,2006 MGB+A D. Adventure Garden The Children's Garden was designed as an adventure park for children, with high viewing platforms, ramps, steps, and cargo nets for climbing, a ball room, and other play features. The garden was closed due to safety concerns and has sat unused for a number of years. The restroom adjacent to it was also closed after it continued to attract vandalism and undesirable uses. This are has become a "hole" in the fabric of Liberty Park and is due for revitalization. Figure 22-Children's Garden l features that remain, behind P ? _� ' chainlink fence and a "Closed" Jr, ,,- ' �. , - 'j',� , sign. :. 1„. 0 w Figure 23-Restrooms that have i °� ''-. : been closed and are � - r r recommended for demolition. This plan proposes to demolish the Children's Garden structures except the vertical poles. Demolition would include the platforms and climbing elements, as well as the restroom and ball crawl. Several vertical poles will remain to become a part of a "forest"to be created with additional decoratively carved poles of varying heights and new evergreen trees. S Benches and sitting rocks will be added to the area to provide places to picnic and sit. The design includes berms, groupings of boulders, sandstone stepping stones and a woodchip walking surface add to the naturalistic atmosphere and sense of adventure. The design encourages people to explore and play. + , _ -,I I�- _ \' (u ices ions Figure 24-Plan for the former ..(� uildin Children's Garden to be \ is transformed into an 'Adventure 'e+_ 'j Garden." z.�,* . Historic Bridge , eo yL .-''� - ,a. Streambed I v �a i '' �� '{ Picnic Pole Forest with' �. `.'` 1 �' .' - , I 4.r Seating Area Y, ♦ , ;i 0� Sandstone "" - _ ' ., 4,k Stepping Stones\ ''.. ,. p ' — Woodchi surface \s4= ~ �' P c A to imitate Forest Floor\ This reconstruction would also improve an old streambed in this area. Currently, excess water finds its way into the plaza area and parking lot, creating slippery, mossy areas. Because the water table is so high and the numerous artesian wells in this area, drainage is a common challenge in the GO Liberty Park Improvements—Concessions and Children's Garden Page 11 Landmarks Commission Review April 20,2006 MGB+A park. This plan creates a meandering dry stream bed from Liberty Lake, underneath the historic concrete bridge, toward Tracy Aviary to the edge of the concessions area. This stream bed will collect excess water and create an attractive natural feature while improving the area's drainage. In the future, some permanent water flow could be introduced into the stream bed if desired. Figure 25-Area south of the 11, concessions building where a ✓ stream once.A proposed dry �; streambed here would improve " site drainage. -J ' 4431 renew Accent Tine, SNOW limbo, Salo._H l:mheg Figure 26- Typical cross-section of the proposed dry stream bed. `. ` Ih dcme Slat 4 H.•ed SIm Wall 004,, tillSirtem Ned a. II .. A new picnic pavilion is proposed on the edge of the adventure garden to fill an unmet need in the park for medium-sized group gatherings. This pavilion can host groups and parties, and give them easy access to the adventure garden, Liberty Lake, rides, concessions and amphitheatre. The pavilion design will utilize the poles from the ball crawl as for supports and will match the concessions building in materials and form. Liberty Park Improvements—Concessions and Children's Garden Page 12 Landmarks Commission Review April 20,2006 MGB+A • • -------/ Figure 27 New picnic pavilion ` 7 created built on the foundation I�:: — •:/ -- 1 of the previous ba/I crawl ';1 building. . limn ii 0 _- i ,-1 I 1 ,Iii-k,r.... .,[.. 4..... . s _,.. ,i.:t.:,:,:, '- t if „___ 11111 11 1 .ore. Figure 28-Overview of the � �• . y,4„ 1_I „� redesigned garden area- * w : Jprii r E. . 411411k , - S ' i '•, ... . - k . .7i- : . ..; ' .,.14, , . . ., „ . `i. Y 66. Y II Figure 29- View of the 'pole forest,"showing seating rocks, I existing poles(grey)and new 1 i poles(brown). _ , 7 1 / III, — p ,e ,__Y 11110100111*, Liberty Park Improvements—Concessions and Children's Garden Page 13 Landmarks Commission Review April 20,2006 MGB+A Ida 4. CONSTRUCTION AND A. Phasing MATERIALS This Master Plan calls for a number of different improvements that will be phased over time. This plan calls for the Concessions Areas, World Wars Memorial and the Path and Allee to be completed first. The second phase would encompass the Children's Garden and the streambed improvements. The final phase would include the Amphitheatre and Liberty Lake • improvements. Each phase of construction will build off of the previous elements built and utilize similar materials, colors and textures set by the precedent of previous elements. The specific materials and construction techniques will be determined as each phase of work is approved and funded. B. Materials The elements in this design will utilize natural and muted materials. All structures, including the pavilion and amphitheatre will use natural cobble stone and wood shingle, like the concessions building. The rebuilt World Wars memorial will use a similar combination of concrete and textured plaster. New site furniture, including benches, trash cans, and light posts will match the existing Liberty Park standards. Natural features, such as the dry streambed, the new amphitheatre berm, landscaping, boulders, and the "forest floor" of the Adventure Garden will use materials, shapes and forms that blend with the surrounding natural landscape. Every attempt will be made to blend seamlessly into the existing fabric of the park and make this area appear as if were always there. Liberty Park Improvements—Concessions and Children's Garden Page 14 Landmarks Commission Review April 20,2006 MGB+A --- =MEIN� - p p O O O A p m O O -o N-9 P CT Q Q Q P V a- ti' a =8 N fI• CO CO ...I Ol N A W N + co (� O .4 O° ti D 0 3 -. C R °: c rJ n a D o m O O p o O 0-C a O lro 0 ON . p N• W O N ^p r 3 p r W p n O g -CZ O 0 O O C d 0 Q0 o 0 Q 0 QO y Qo n ago c)Qa =O'a dQ' O Qm 1 o `-n''y x � Po 3 ``P° ow fD `° 3 m<_. nm-, m1c)m'z 'i m'2 22 QO m` 2 (7; O 0 m o m M«`m'c»2.0x o�. 0 2 of m2 x m 2.k m 2o 02 G� 20 3 2 .a V 0ay =Qona-0PT a � 0c D0gymo,-0m aaS �vW o� O yvo n �° � N O w ', 3 g 0 �3 m QN to 3 a o m 3 y i5 3 0. 3 0. 3 3 c o 3 0 b • 3 A'o,". n j x N0 0 s d 0 CD CO 0 N C O 0 N 'D j 0 j o ra j 6 t0 J 0 m 3d wFoAmNo I°e n2. m oCIm "o WQ 5g mo3 oQ w =��w m you c � aotn� oA 0pm oN oc `. c !01�.o;d Tm8O a .nom yo£ o�'i - om om osz_Tzop oP2 rp w an d o�� ^° o o W a`� _ Pm 3 o.a a P 3K ¢ 0- OOO k CN , C ? 0 O m T c Z o P 0 _ ' 00. 0x P 3 m a N a N n Z- m ° o 0p O y N > n0 co - N O N i i O-° so N W.7)Fri 1• n - a. NT.' <0 WN 0 0 'Or0 r° ° C p.0 0 A p T N y N B A O O5- Q N + ID o ° co QDoFc ti ° No ,2m wy .2 vi mo CD v0 y� ° m Ao Ig5 1 m m 3o n gn '2N '2 t° _=o cm — Z c ° ° a oA m �' 3 m a O 3 n 0 a) F N D ° y .° ° ° i i m m m N< N N d C O.N °- O N IU N W Co '�IInn OO d 0 4 N a Tf O 3 NO C 0 j 5 5 N ' CO a N Q 2 TI O ^ 0 N o. n 0- F F C N 3 wrn a.a o Q w o- m - w A ao n m . c » .2 nO, 3 m m fD c 0 6 0 o m a n Q o Am-0 (n a 3 3 D a m C7 N C O'O tJ j N -2 0 3 tD 0 n p -0 0 E. N a 0 Uf 3 _' ..�.A n j O CJ 1 Cl Ol t00 co N y l� 0 ;•N o ° Go C m 0 H a W O. a m m C1 ° f° a. a 0 o W o ..y C. 'm a No D m 0 c E. N N »W C n • iii O .-■—_-ME MEE= xi Board ■-.-_--_-_-_ Mayor e . a to coA c c df 0 N N A N 0 0 H V t0 00 Co W -. N W N OV N V 0 O A U. 'O n D N N O> _, 0:, N N W C O CO N V On CO D 0 d ▪ V N p W '~ 0 -- 0, 0 W O m 0 0 n n V W N 0, W m o A u D v g y elco N N A cocn v- m O d V N °i 0 y ° ° m ...a 0 oIII m m m 0 o (0 ao V CO CO N V (O 0 A N V n V « a y 0 3 Vp V e. Q▪ W Ol 4 V C H ° -O ao O A N N b N 0 .•a of S O 0, V V b O A toil co EL Z Z z z Z z z l0'a O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 Z0 Ip 0 N A W N 0 N m R A 3 0 e 9 0 co ID WC) _, ill 0 d O O O 0 Z N N ON A w N - N - Q.o 0 D o v v ti 1 ^ 1 D 8 y /'� ' ia'N R a 91 a \] c1 L N T N� &i qv LS Dom_-a Dom_ 9 m " ' �v 0 A Snw =oa 1 =oa r0 ` gn- .. ° A W q E W m � oa� oon waNF.o y�yso w a' o m ° n3•wf V � ~ d' 1r- m1r� 22 aa-. N c£ a 2 N`o '0 £ �'p m5.m,r, N nm m �;.-z 0 0 D ~ oo2.a 0 a 'm a £ =' »m .a •N m 9. d a ? ° a ' OpO '< N n S a a •o 3. p ? T c 3 o y , a 0 E. d N w S 5. y N n d y a w N 2 N 6 '^ 'a a- s. • j .N2. rp0_2O2 CC ~03 5•Nm d °. �So2 Da N v y.2 a,p2 28 g 3 ` 3 o a a g n rnf ma jp v-Eomx a Nf' O '<2rn-5aa � F -2 m �. w is N E9 O S O O@ N R' o S Q. <, a < 2 A (p a x J rn P.N ao V.� N p o_a < O p N m O oo m om o a o 3 w p g d m £ 3 o` w a_°m '°'x m '" N o g F 3 ° 3 x" - ..•.n m`p » ° _2 N a D �i a a ai O 8T, 6 8 a°a fk< c'.3 ' f° S32 m .7 3 m n � aag a-`8- 0 o 2 m m m �o go - 7.7 c !� a m od mv3 �Dmoi OpaaE ap? m WE-E 0 'ax,T £ o5 c m N o " v < y w o d 9,0 _.m o SOv�a m_ a ,Nm 'o•w8w Bm m a m o w A m o m a o S a m g o O a m p a 'a. o Dm D3o'm m�'o�.� 2a 'r w N.a D 0oaa °' 0 m a <3 co N >0 N.N. N a 0 `»2 o > 0 ? N C N `, N N ° a EA N N M -0 0 N O `D .. `=p N N n N.N N 1 W O N a p �•`5 ' 3 p O Q�,.Q 3 -CI j N p o - j a 2 p p a C 0=j 0 W N »R.S N_j N S N Q 9.5. O G O ' ° 0 0 3 ?° `� »m m a ° 3 W 2 a oc� a m E»»a nr nfl a » a ° v o O.3 a, 10 c_ w 0 2-0 8Nr. N N a ff�oN °' o m m'o oN•3 m' a �� m u,.m m 0 (P a N ' aa; N F N (D N a N N 10 - N D. O N O 8 A W p a » '.3'2 p N A W N.O m-° mNA= -WNalAW .-mAN-s M NW p a 3 CD N N VAN. 09 00 -f9 EA<A fA A°1 A W W. co. 000 p N 0 0 0 O 0 W = O O O 0 0 0 O O O O O W O O O O N p - N N O O O O G O p 0 0 0 N O O O O A O O W W 00 O 0 00000 A O `2 yr 0" k EA fR 09 O . 00 M CM a W N Board w A W N Mayor T < tl N Ma M . M I A I O 0 p 0 p p V D'V n w w 3 0 w CD C V' .J W O G W O O o U 0 op A o o S o 0 a n 0 0 o S o 0 on on D 3 on.p `� w 00 `" N 3 a`NG S o N V p " ,,, O c N 0 o o v 0 g S o o 8 8 S o S 8 �° p 0 0 n?C) A ba + N 3.� C �w O 0 0 0 :.Ts oo a ° 0 0 p `A. g -ny p c a c p o CO z �az c0 3 Ill c0 o ., O° N 0 '. N 0 l z z z .a m co CD ma3 ' > > "a p ry O - 0 m N N W 3•• co m j`= m a=m o m„�1 ° y y. m d2,.. Q.W+'''d .m a '�D m o aP cj ?N ° °mx 0 8 4 d N.) R -^a. a'cn . O 3 � •• _ , p N Ot O S 4 0 • N G to co -• N DON Dp w ;1 P o DT m P m 32 a y c>O 1 m -0 O-0 A-0 r mO 0 T-O N -I p� y p NDN -<n?.N R. W3 < p' = ' > > n m aC W^ a -•o Oa oO W y pNQO » y N at --,,a '� m n m 3 N N ' AD , ' - ' 0 .D.-0 O)O W a<, VN — O° '0 NF) ° 6Nraanj JnNO O Wa Wp f NDZFANp y a o ° m 3 .Z ; thou m J _nm - v 3 a N W ', W > N '9 m a o + o _ "m oO W, 3 o ' m E c o* m,5 o W tf a 2 o m m 3 o a -1 r T n ur 2 y*y<6 K W o y r g,No-o D m W' 1mm " oo ° o.� a .m'a g Ham•Wo W.62'D° ale , 0 '-('p O o fO 5 2 y » Q» a O.,gyp O O m 2 fA O' tO o 0 0 (D D_,' N C (D N ry N O 3 N 0 J'CD < y' . 0 O o p t0 o n ' W 3 ry C U 0 N N<Z H�.0 0^ =W 0 • �. a.W m (D F. T 4i fD W y O,D F 0.(o W W N O O O ti rn 2 7, O •< -.‹_ 5-a = n_g0 o y ° W n go n. a (n o 2 m 'mD W ° D c 3 p,° Q°-cDo u ,2 °oo, y r. N y 'm W i n»o =o F m g a d m °1 K T O m s » •g'.m2 El x tliH aZ W hU "..' Qg3cl=3f W• m N O < .°. . .°.. j- A H.H. p,3 �m % .° n= m ao- � vo'^g m ° ,v, �c m iv°Og.x<m W Q2 - Q° 3 ' o,22g; g.� 2a m 'W_sk» * yxE4.3a2,01pm� N O� Om ° m o' i s a 0P m ti3Op O 2.Qa N = = � N O< = °'m o y W E N O •7O w_a-N T "o-o m mx'<a c Ma ..... m g03 w 2'.m Q00 a o iD N m a •m T W ZO m <T a O C N t0 N W O. N 10 W a g a o j T^p N QD fD N - N 0 O O C D O�. o d m? m'm a W rtt c ^..-ni a'oo n° o W m 3 n n m 3 o �-o _7i m m a R'F a N m.o a o 3 ,off . �, 3 A a°' Q m y O 3 F'01 Si) f° m O w n p n j m m' na 3 w m % m g O 3.m o y W m w a 8 O N - N m'_ ±Ono n 3 m a a n m o FO x y N c m N ° m m o�' m' w o p m_= �. ° o g m. m° o 'm°�o x- m � o On m a' ? m n.`^. ° o o° ° ° o ' m c °' y f.9. N o '_" o �2.<..5m gym ��.? 5 p1 �omy 00.0E m 5�ry` Amm 20 c�DD'�-a om ° o ,wr„ j-o.y a'o c wy 3 W 2 oo O F. • H� A3 3 m ° O y.Cu 0 m 0 f. W 0 o m o m o N 0 n Q>: o 0 3�' m 0 m m o m o - A O ° ° n 3 W ,O D N{7,N N 3 59 A C (D W N m m p3j d O =_,N?G 3 n om o Ga3a N m o U1nZco A ° �a = 'moo' 3 c _O3 Nayac Wd » OOOn oaOO 0 O0000ym N.N ^o'a N_ °f0 `' < C m N N j N O ti m N Z O T'00 y093 m y m a, < - m W y o�' 0 o o D m 3 = cW, 2. n �D m 3 d o3i = m n m.*Z a a m' o. o o =Z 3 m O A e o N A N° y 0 y 0 0 0 p 0 0 y 0 0 0 0 O m �i 00 d'0000 ° O Nja W NCO O A W NO O N Ao°. T -N N _o o W N E 8 po 0 0 0 O Sj O O O O c O,N A W N..a -N A W�a =m m A OW N a F N fA N(T N EA O N o moo. o fA .64 fA fA EA fA di EA.fA Hi fA ...H).fA o O- 0- o o A N N N N V O O o 0 0 0 0 0 G OT O O O N m J>IT A N O -.m.... N_ 0 0- 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O W J O O N V O O O O O O O O O O O N00000. co--- N O O O O ° O O p Oo 000 J OOOOO •+OOO-LO 'z yi.o O N00000(T 00000 NOOONO to y, W O O O O O W 00000 W O O O W O A 6) N 0 ' 00 V N Board N -, 0 Co 0 N Mayor T to T N 4 a a 0 O I N O N NO O O0 O O 0 OO O 0 O 00 0 V O • D m n v,3 o v O N O A C ° O g 0 0 is. g o •,tn goo�'°'°. 0 0 0 0 O vE w 6.4 6, r'3° va ,o so a ac O 0o No 0o 00 N O 0 O soO N Op po g O o O o'�O. IA y 3 0° W A N O a 2 a cn o c. pc o3a n O p O c, § p p w 6(n O p o O O Z o Z Z co ° N d 3 N On. O (D ¢ 0 ° 0. O Z m O Zw'O O _. O m n O .Oi 0 i O O'0 N W ^. 2 W '> > N N 0 .W'n y m o o m N y v m 3 m m' ( m a g W o m W a N O O_J N On VMS'� O.S W 3 8. 37. 11 m W ° In 3 P z O w ,. Ili Y, N N C' m a w 7 V . Dom m y 0.0c w O-D� m OIR Tcn 1 T _ A m 2 2 0 y al-2 O 0 0 (0 C. J. m J.N H x - d p n ;2 T A .n.a n y A m N » -1 N J -w vn 1 �' )n+ m V � vt TA om p1 n a_, .' N T J O N 7 p N pj O y p T co O T co N p w N j J j '� _I EC (1 N •� O J '.0-? N Q T a N O C A O 1 z o0v 5--I .y. nO T T.d..3 0. -11 od ?,. a n J H o 6 ^� a m n ^a y� o 0 0 (oG m N d. ..2 » 2 9 ;g p 3 a'O,2 p 0 2 •O or . a. _ z� NNg Sea oN c N oao .3. Jo ? D x. m o -w NQg-_ COCj' Nd2 NNC I a N'O ' p3N C p ^(p J NmCOp3 p9 0. O T OO N 2F JmW okaAarNN Om9I3 ym J N o-p uN6 Nof> > -1 i s W SIN3 � P'O°a n' n o• oa Am ..E.m J o Qo mc.n 3mN �aC 3 � a •pO om= 0 oj ,2 � N a� o S � oTN s.Ooj G T o f. C' �` N o •m • "omooNam6mm - m =q 0; a to � mf o ^ mNO=� o?� » o �<' ' d NmON m NmONa Nac n OooF =sa ooJ0 I m. 3ca mppm-I..J mE. oo oam oo nj **.n o p» SEo °., m = a d om my aom r 2N.,Np- N O.Td3 L n 7m ON. P NS m al m q m palC � p .-ci�. OOp O.m q N J ,:t°I a, g C ? US" .n C�D' (C Nod.�o.q - 00o N Qo O J• -Z Q S O A I z c 2 D in v r°'n m on N 'w_ •' o o m o 0 m 0 0 w Jw P .< 0 0 -i o 0 O A -onS+ m =F.,N EL 3 Hf tq W ON _ O O O N y O O 0 0 0 0 00 O 0 0 Q 00 H co a A . N Board ,+ m c'n i. 'w Mayor T .,. C N p w N a O m Ocn0 O.N.10 0 O p O a O OV o O O O O t 0 o T N Eq M �_ 6a O 2 W p p N U N y O O o o .g.9.2.1 O O 0 0 0 D T 3 o- N 44 5q M O p O 0 o .. o N 0 0 ,_a. � i O O O O O 0 ,-.0O O II ec .44 4 w o c O C G a a N p p c o 8 z o 7 W . —E nz z z m z , , , > > O mn O 2 ry .m.m m m Jm NO JNd ..d OT '6 F Ip m m. Nmc C)mcc 5 O T N S 0 N ..N O. z A p,z Om N N N C S a a o N - N ... 0 w W ooama n 7)3 mao8na aA(7/A w ^o J oEl F 5 o J c -4 ^O . N R. `c^�3 m o R. m o rnn 0- =maag ,a�' v0 — 'm G N''' aa'a- _ ? 0 A n 0 A a n V 0 < 'O �' n< N W v J e »o' C o J u 7i d 311.4 !‘' fD 3 N 0 ^ O ' o 3 o F f a 0- m coi o 0 0 3 a m o w cvi O o' ' J a o (o' m d a a °F' ag'aaop aR.w inwa N3o 5m< , H •m �s� 02 rn32wozJ5.2aao'»om o my axc PS P g o0m »acn m o m g .3 m x m 2 o" ;m �,o G W o m en o'm e 9'w o'. m A o m po n 2 a N m .....2 J m. oo c _' m �' 3 �^ t0 J O _.O j a d 8 W peg , N A S . N [g O g a N a g N 0 =.N.p "0a a N J O y N O N a 0. n O�' W 00 a 0 y^0 2 m '.. c < pa 2,F a x o m o ."o N m p g o€ m o a 9»0 I.' C0 J »lgj3 0SdAJjN ONO CS. " Z ni3iA r N P. ' O J .> a a -c O a N O o S W 8 N O 8 c ti 0 A j N O 0 E OS O A 3 N O.0�.N f=Y 3 � n� om � �3m`om »P93 tea, a 0� 5 5mw�» .. 3 o m»az o" aoa d y fn 8 - y f 2 P O y 7 n o J-mofi m ,� m < . y s, m a o J «a m n 0 w �m �, oo.m y� »� y3m g_ a ^o 0 -0. m QJ - oP. F f o o m _,w_ = m 5, 3 F wom m 'o o QD8 , oa o< N m .o g 4 o m a n 3 y J �g. 0 N o o m 0 o 00 - K.=y C a g 0 O^4� J N o-'N 3 o f O Oo 0 C.O.o 0 0 J a 3(0 O . j t0 7a N = W O(DJ � n 0 O cE� _f �000mm ..3 a 3a o g '�.°ma it2 N (� xmav3 a Jron m a mn �cma a j OW O fQ _ -- N N < N J N 9'S ma 3 oR'�^ oJligi a. N m 03 m 3 m m J o o!� m wen o Na o ^» O j g z,:O 00 N O a N O a m 3 O ti 0 a ? O� e ^.O J O a 0 N N S N 0 2 a o O T O 1D j O a y 0 O N O j O a N O.O 0 X . O ^¢n O a fD -'�O to O i d N C O 3 0 O O U C m� a 3 61.. N N. N.O N 000 00 a O0 000 N o m ' Board N NI N N O ' 'm Mayor a j o c o a a d J o N A a a O c a 0. O m o GO O w O p W O 0 0 0 0 V 0 n-n w 3 o a O a W p 00 thO 2.CJ.N ' 6� 0 00 0 0 O'G 0 V O 00 O O n a 3 0 ,2 M 44 6a 6a aOO VLAN0 O O .Oa OO 0O N 0 O n a m 3 i oc « V G 0 J A0 0 V J n N O O O^a N Vth 0 O 0 0 0 Z Z Z W O 5.O O a a o 0 0-_ a z 0 2 m.0 10 aJ a ao m a o ' o 0 O O O O O 0 (n �' N g W N - O J D 3 N N N y to 0 3 13 a a $12'8a ."..a; z Tg-a o u+ (( 0 m wN 0 O d w V W N A u ,F82 d m O�m p -i g8n obi w Rod m e;, Do➢'0 T) O N O-'➢TJ TJ p�Dv -0 3<p'N C) 3 w^. < N - »N y O .-y-.O»m N 0 O m Y 3 N T! -m O .a O »0 O N 0 ».N O y N O m O �' N f.m m 0 j N N N j R. co 0 vt W l -0(AD N N O j O N -p m W -0 m OI 4'i •0 77 N N a »O) 71 ' »N N _ E O W mU n] 3 A nm O N _-) rn " MO a NC701 n W n.-m m j fD N O ^. < T] O -0 7)7 0 55 o w i 2 a D.d . 3 f0 m v m 3 ?N m • r- F»n y 0 0-i N j a 0 o O W m rnmo a �309- 2_0•a 0�03 0�,, o0vo8.0 m 9.o0 0 .3�0T' . 0 A O N N..N.O(1 tD a O 5. ° '3 "-O o j 4 3 m a x d d m a .�.N 0 m t? ^m.Q 2,K mf2 c, joa=wm P2a0am o330 `f' 3 83a - ° 93 z vi»^� a vi 2.°' o a '°'o m •3 m m m x a o k o a 5.,-,a, 3 a a F 3 s u d 3 2 c,3 o y ° -o., g 0 `-‘2 O N y E d 2 2 ' O ry o a• N O j 18 N m m (D y Q 0 y = N i O O d.O N y _.N Q. -l 00,9,2--S.N 61 E»m O T 3 to . a s 00,=. O l n _. n 3 3 0� s T.N d- ,m v, x m R o m a o 3 y 3 w m ,n y W v v m C7 .s- m g?7 d o 3 r,00._-1 N o 3 00 m g N.- o o 0< a 2.-' 4 g,y A x, m . 7N O _ » m? w N o m 3. rn o -.m ' 3 ?'o w' H ».n d v ..y,3 m .. d ur a 'm w W. .Z g v 3 3 1° °: o'm a. o on-3 - 3 .+mam g�oaam E� a-7 m°vo :° &3'3 ro E.n�f0m P. p 0° 0 03 m o 3a3 F. ur yam m oo �av, as»3 a a5o .. e,2, ma2 n:0 3yy o 'mr„ -n; o o3aac `0 -'t ce G no " m 3E'ow ° ' y. f° `in o° cvia ft a0 W`m' a W L 0 3 J o 2 v 0.ai a o 3 o, - y ' F m 'm 3. m o o a• tg A, &i 3 3 S» O ° o - a s y v ° ' a?7 c m 7``2, ° 2 ''W o o ,s °1 c o -I o.2. m y o g m E <n wo 3 om. = moc y am `2' N 3 * 3 > m a -+ moo• D ao ^ m . up9 -lo a , o m o o _3.am ° f o < w a„ • 0 3 330 oT nn N g m ,i n m U N.m..fED 0 N c 1rif .m..n a O3 Nom N 37i !;oD ' y :mo (ON a o o m -U - - w r,� a o.» Q a ma 0 -8 m �3 o* 0 � oallod. m '�' Q!^ CD'-° a oinmom c ? v, no 3 m a Po o » oN u,t' m g,c '•c oo-0 p. m _y ?. > > ma m aw0v 3m Qe 0yv ovv c N�_ O a roam e m N b3',Di N - O N O) J m - O a 01 m N A D q Q° O a O C .' 3 000 C� o �'qo m >je y C3 w nm a »,ac m N 0 O m a N O A y 0 9 M.-O m Si O O 7 n »O y O 1� N 0.N y A C O N Ip D m 2. o N N ~ O N"33 a a m 3 x o� o a. m _,D o o a A o o a N< 0 0 o co-. O oo A W-, Cr' C A ON a O O b 0 —of o A N 3 w �. w— o_• N N O O- S O O O O 00 O O O 0 0 0 o 0 Q M O M...0 ND N N N 0. v O O A " 13 Board f. no N N O ,0 0 .1 o N A u Mayor a y xi c A _. a a o N qo N lH G Ma a 0 O O O O 0 o a O a '0 o C C o O t0 p O C o O O O O o O O OV O O D�0 o v No O 3 0 d W O 6, o o 6, o o.'" n o O O O O O II! 0o OOoo6, O O D v n es 3 v c o m O O 6 0 a a a Z dN dC o a� CO-. no mo '. S. 000 Z am Z ° Z gZm-m an >m >p m m m mo mo-o o o o o 5 mQm ,a3 meC 3 m O L.m J 0 O2 y > mD ;N m ID O Z O O 6 N W W W W Ow0 V 0 N p W N w 12, fD 4. O_3 H »3 0 »0 ° w w N 2 w w .9. .c m w O,c m w » '°n m m ° v C)00.ae .�K �.CO O) ° N O N J 0 '0 0 N w 8 f-a0 w o r 0 O-'r' 0 - co dQ 3 A S. Co = 0 2<� la�i �.0^ _-{? w Wnoo° ?d J N o V N- tD rb OO 7 O O O O.� -0 fA 9 N 73 ° ,C, . w0 w' �c c3.�NO u� 0 oa°2m Od`Dmoy3 � 1D - -1D 21ND m»n1m .o-0 o sv .d� o m p n o....0 o m y O o o y _3 0 7 o wp,3 »o 0 y y o ff 3 o.3 o 9- o H-'0 5.43 0 w- <c m d m m m N 3 w' n m 2 w' m o o'0 C) a s 3 ° 3 0°4 0.3 N ^ 0 .. n 3 0?.n`0 m 0( _ w a o F 0 0 m 0 y _0)0 0 N S' D fk N N F.) q ff- 0 »N o 3 N m G O I- 0 S 0 r °O, a r 1.U N.Ow.V 23 Q0 n rn' a0m ° aw .o0 ' oy of'. .�. m1W. nv _ wn3 . m 0 O-an Nw o w O t» o N x c aw 1 D 2 0 p N ».�. O O Q o o'° o, O E _ 9 o w!^--63 N 0 0 t o 0 10 o a f0 W 0 O w n»N F' o 'o m _dg'mrov ° = Do`2 , x.2. wo c 800 °m � ay s7-v2D » A N ° y t0 N d N A n° EA n.w..w ° 7. W N a ° w p O p° N O 9.� (7 A w "N O N g w O' O .a - A A A 7'cc? a'C n °O= = O 6" II VO X. O N. n O 0 O).0 N 0,Q�.� ° o8, ;0.8 n o�'° = mQ : ,o'v 3 a.o .. d `0w E 3 ° o a 3 3 0- y2 o d ° c�»� ° ° N Q0 s y g D 5 i 5 N o Z 9 0. a 17, 3 of» 01 c - y N» n 5 ^„2 .w. ,5,.m o'1p D o y a of ? ° A m_y' =n0 aaa.T 5g C D1 G°O N t- o g 3 i o^ N y 1 O N W 01 r^ 2. ... 'l �'vo��o0o3 .2R. 005a � 0 momHm ao y •mac �_ f. 3 0� Z Eg^m °° I'll »nw con9mc'nG - o ,,, °o ° m0 p 's'O m° 0 tOoS 3 a m'm o 6 o o -.o F » o m' m m' = 0 w= y NW F t?1° 7 = w a 7 N N' » N N s 3 vol g (7) ° ( 0a U V go - ,0 O, C N n 0_-El0 = 5,k m n� v a - E»3,�,0 g . 0 �v ° m 60. 0 moo v n F ° m °=o °c `m Dl ° do oy'° ion z mm m » o m^ '" R°0 x3 ' p A p3j O y V O OO a 0 < z 0 2 N S f -(Nn J S N S 0 O.N 0 °c 0 m an d o o( 3 !� o n f»m ° fA�0 3 a, c v 2» J Pn QO0 s o0 o F.2 m ,'o. n o m 0 m. o 0 •0°-R° o 0 5 m n 5 2 g ° 2 » R° o 2. A N O N y rt y Q°N = 0 0 O c N (1 01 »O N V .dn N d T fD o N O N g C N 0 *ID o O a° F m O$ m m' °' c o - W v+o m((JJ p N N O_ S 2.fD o .n. T. y CI O a N S J A' f0 b 2 m O D- m �o_C p = o 00 m m A w� 'm H� D 3 0 o < . CO �0 2n 1° Z o o 3.0 Ti ›clw fD R. �' °: JN n�m°' o N� '0, o .„ 1 m � s»' � o 3 _ o �° o (a P. to O N O r?w >> I. .� '' 5. R.v' m m F o 3 3 o m O o O w w 1 0 1 0 0 0 -a -a E O .°. t O m d 0 O O 6 ° fR A H A 0 N. 66 00 . .6. _ 00 -ON O p O N -y O O O O 0 0 O o 0 0 00 00 O- 0000 0 0 O O C p0 O O O O o N M W W O V a, A W N w Board o O N A C D oV own N Mayor O S-° O._ T N- N Ol 0 0 { p 52 F O M M M L O O V W V CI O E. M N N N C: 6 ppj O N W p p 0, V q ° A O N N ONO o O O o G CO.wi(O O a O a O a 0 0 o o O 0 V O 0 IA D MO, O 3 ° a 0 m o `� o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0�na 0d'i D o 3 343 .4 q C N O V O O O O O O 0 O.O.a m w D n -a 3 °c V ° O b C w c, . N V w�w N z O R. - �o °Oz z z a2 o z Cm 3 c0 . Cw 3 ,c'0 t0° 0 0 0 m0.0 m 0 dm i 2m 3, 21 ; Zmm ° ° m m g o m m 0 m F m 3 m o g . 'm_ m m m m z 0 -4 w Oo O Do 2611 - Oo c Do c Doc b 0 r.o T N v m om "'< ; d F' oO " om 'n'Cr g oc"i A(� 0 O n n\ N- 40 ..n W y n W\ 3 0-< W- N . 70 -I�..� N - n n n O »i N T \ 17 N -0 ° -0 C. W N > > ti O f.lET N .. w J J 0 O y.m '1 a-.o 8E31 D tn-� 1 : n o2ed-a °,2 ; D � sp` 025c� a a v s 2' yv mnoo�o 0.�. P W f U( 2 ° O .O. N p < D'0 »N 8.tp ^N. .Oi .6.?C 1 P O N n P~ o5 W as 5�a a3 a " J ""o om n �m a. `G m y"' g' . y'� (° m z _o N ? m N^ m F'o N W m m n,?y m' p D 5 m m x - 3 xi W fD• ` J N n 5. W5. 0 o '3 � ^n'o vN m 1°o as c v O �d '^N 'g-m P3O m ' O� P_ N m P O � O D gN �E.2 3N - S cR T. O ,O N g Q m jy W� m ` O Nti' A ' P2 QN m = to(OO ,I�o1mNw i memo » avoy x^ oyy � ri -0 m ?a_a � 3 .,.mqT GN.•<m H c`O=$ m o O O g -Cr'W O m o o »V �•m .F.' CO O o Ov• CUgO � =Ac E 000 aNmbm^2, Wz.. .6 Wa-m o E, . m -. o m oZ now. 0 o0 3 co�� 9 aCx ,$a � m0wn� Q°m ^. c o . d o(oN. m AiOm x a. VOmaw m m ( iC Aa0 _. N mam o . u2• SE aO§7 DN. o (D C o?0m rnv m • 0 a' O "wVD A3NmV m o / toO ( 0'.y. N N • 07N m nm m 6 a y P• w w$ 3 N m..�m o o O mo 0NOd 2 Om oOO o ptvn� T . g. W a 0 o R. o Nb Ul p y o OV m W.) Nn Oo Oam o .0 A CDW wnoa - in- . - m 3"O O a V O NO T j O D0. r W N 20 O #t o mN'Om U t N it; P. . -D v 2Oq mo N »yo 3 ticVon °:y a<n °W a�- a ?a i pc, 3 aSomuN ^ c o 3 a..o 2rn3. a »addmm o A30 m§. cc 33gW o a c, c, Ta ID a a' a -n C O o. on I N O Q Board Mayor 4.n a M A T N N O _N N Oq 9 0 p G p tin o in N cam O V A 0 O ..( N O f O C. p O o O p o O 0 0 p Op p V O D-n 3 o v o W o C o m w a n 0 0 0 a D v' 3 o w = N'0 tpp C.N O O O DE 0C) 3 ° o O o - m = ^av; W ��W'o z mO o Z -0 -o (n a Dmj m O d m C P O p ,m..m P m y P (o p1 g m ?: m m m m O. D P 3 m m Co 3 cat° c 3'c $�- D2Svv ; D-o g�v Dv gv; .. 6 3 c a O C C O B O 2 0 � 0 ' O O.N 3 -' 'o.(N a a N a n N N 8 ^N 3 1 i j N 3 ,D P C O ] (D T. 3 m D—' 3 m m _n a m_,m ^ m i^m » m ^y 0. O z m •n O m ..3 -47 5 a N o 0 W ' VN o O - O m O CO - N F. N Tl' O a N O : 2 J_N O S a N O 4, m^ 2 m < a 'o. a 6 a 0.• a 4- W ».. N O m N m m 3 O d V N . N 0 C) N 0 n G<; N 7) A 9 W g.d T d M N o j ^' N_n O O d 2<'O s a y N 0 W tp O m y m 3 O O W N CO.a9 O O CN m S-.m N SN o m 2 A E.5 2O.a O mNmo: a oto 3,2<m w� .r330.ag. v0to" o sm m m 1p C 3 y R. m %o a s m f. o o c 3 tr8 » 0..,� 0' »a� Ao, »D mmym = t80 2'mo E. 3 °0 a g 3 tp ..8 8.- - a o m »0 m mo a a nyg'a'com » c2,�-2am Dm 3 `^ 2 O. .A-. I (0 t0 t0 U �p .O m j T_»? C A m v 3 ? m m m m "m » = o a o ..a m 2.vE p 0' m3• »- ypo'a o 2 xym Q m a O.= 3 .O O W O O O.O 8 a 9 Q� O3 a°g l� •y y § m p°pt 3 to m n o'm t-°S 0 'm' o a 3 pi T. G Q. tm - j'T S O 0 ' P s n A• N O j m m 0=m fl• O S D 3 »A m Q O N o O _. O_.W S p°a 0 __a Q.. P.7 3 to=O°N o m m m-O N m N 5 0 3 o m 3 m a C 9 a�5.a a`3'�? F F 3 c m r-• 8 3 pe c m o c o 8 j m *.m -'-0 5 o o N a 0 F�m L a,n m o ' g a F- tf' o rob m H. 0 g- m d.m E.f, o o v a S' 0 3? < m a R m p°j . w 3.aaa va o�-mL'.»g =a O m 0 -i i N swN y• 69 N a 0 O o m Vt N O 3 N C'ijA =oo.om ? tIPliu O ry m3 0 m v . m 0 m c ? g m o w m T T w O N m "o T c 0. S a x U O Q N Board '" Mayor T N a o a ym N cam O 0 O 0 p0» 0 OO O • O 0 V O 0 O -0 n O r.O N O , g 0N o m d m 0 0 -n n O 0 0 0 D�g o' m O Np N C O m S N O 0 0 p a 0 C) Hoc I n "am m 0 C o mo z m Oy z tm 7O g m O y O m to °: u C m co 0 a a 8" z 3 m °—' o 0 F.�nn ' t O. °O,O Doa3 D'o9 g0 3 �0 3 g0 3 ° v 3 'Y] V NT i-. O� m _O.< m ?<y -< 0 a<D 2 a O q a _w - »d .^.. a0 a »aoi - aof a a' N ^ f• - o� N-o N (7N NC,' N N_nN N0R N0N NN Tw7 ' R< u ^U N N - N V 2 '6 A O N O ' P.N N N ....... _V V FIT. V T N V A w NJ \ i 5 a a a a a +^ p a e,m »3 '--{ n m o 1 r m v v 1 v n N ' o W A O N O d > > 8 O 1 IT O N O 1 T N (7 4 O 1 T T() 5'1 T -'N 1 f_ o y -m a-o'r, o b 2 5 D ,< °o o o a tSE i N' 2 N 0•»0 w m 1' y m y a H o',2 C Q O � m' a a 01 8322 m> 2, am ^s .0AH-m gu,N� ANa •m < oo olao'Cms , 0 SrC 3 m N m`°a 2 D 27,0 g m " N a,5:m f° O o4 0 3 V? N N a° N g 0 3 2 g a.0,5-2 o A c a9. 5 GC io om _,0 O 'W o . ry- 2 yo w .o.a 0 o SG (D G � O N � a O^:C.(Nj y O Np0 A w N 0"O a n ».A O N aso -.W 1 J5� o3m $��Dy � 0)ona �, w ° ' m �,v » a ?ma o' oj � � �� (n 'm D. n e'nQ > > t»,'o N ao� N m`-'.a ^a - » 0°O �r, F n N- a N(D » 6 ° ,O o 0 to� O r, Pw- ao 0 r)a m<a oo 2 moo a o 1D m 0 9' 0 w dw m o `c ti. d O (O`< N C 0 0 '�O m co =�W �1 W O Cr ' x a 0� A»N N ^NN ry 5 a O c Va (' N P a am• O a O ¢OO2 p 71N0 a a r 1,s , 8'_ 2 wao� = � om � mo• ,om a o5'O � o � pg()m � o62o < � adm us' *gm• o 3`m•o5 prnoo •° xC °w m?'O 5" .- y 2' w V .9) aa 310 om w»0a ° 0 ^o°, m �,o $ � w�i; m 5,N ..' 3 r a -.cm_a, aYQ' ro oy ,, n5 A »aa'y 05 Ta 3.5 A v0ro C7 a tr0 s- f n m 6 o a 0 5 c m �" m R.-0a o 0 0 0,0,5 0 w�5"; 1°'a' 0 n m Q p a, =.- . n' wa »om a OI,om - �• ooc ' <alo,a' m 2.o Qo or n 'N 4=�a m a m ari? 2. am ma Tno ��ov� �0a0 ? x.� -b oa m� �o Ny3� 2oc ON ma- A eno@N o'»'0 »0 C » (oi ��� � o o �$ a 0E»m ° mw.F y�T3ca am...3 6,2 m(oa a�• 0 5 t0-a N a N P.,D °.O n . O•�^.- T N N -0- O= fD O N n.N N 'ti• �Qma w �, '-" Dn a N2a <o `.a°o Om caAF o prn N m io _ `m o- .0 1 0 o•- o od o- a `m a 0 b'•••' w y a ' 1'a m' d o a c a. o'er (n . 0a --3 d 0,, , .00.cno N `a y m3•No R. a,o na d vo 0 g. lilgIN OE. y m o g. 3. W�o 3 ^? o ;,E. 3 0 0 � a 0 � N io y a 2 m 3.- o 2 a 2 m 3 o o a m or y Si^, n y r:°o d o a n o a0t° a,55, 5 o - m - o a O ONA-,O m E O O O O 0 -O>,r N- a a O J N6,40 _ N O O N w N abb..O O O O O N pO Q ° 06 M to 0, N + Board N + Mayor m + - Ma. "m N 00 o m la N a w d. g a" Co V O Vu W -.A N C C •a W a o G N N N O O O a N b p V O p a a D a C) 4 3 O a o O tta C N O O O A y o 0 0 0 0 0 a 0 "'aa 0 (, a Da3 w o ea o o 0 o Wo = N o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ..a N 0 D a O 3.g 0c g N 0 o O. N " U. D, . z c 'o z 'o 2a z m o f 3 ,av 3 o 0 V 0 C (� O x f-, 2 a O O 0- m o- of v 'D m v, 3 t N N m N -,o m F 0 g o a m,o oP 0)N a -Itn-0 '0-0 "a -0 a -0.p ..a`O.O O A`O.I N N �O,f0/i N'O t2n a N 2.»V (Alt »N . tD N_ O Q 3t0y.N m00 , N o N »N '�N OZ O ,p C' N-a O N.N.-610 O p ry cn g', d a N a 2 p